Xref: utzoo news.misc:3202 news.sysadmin:2485 comp.sys.mac:33563 comp.sys.mac.programmer:7025
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp
From: mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)
Newsgroups: news.misc,news.sysadmin,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Official Legal Announcement regarding Apple's Source Code
Keywords: legal stuff
Message-ID: <394@v7fs1.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jun 89 00:37:30 GMT
References: <2073@astroatc.UUCP> <2928@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> <841@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Reply-To: mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)
Organization: Video 7 + G2 = Headland Technology
Lines: 25

In article <841@hydra.gatech.EDU> ken@gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) writes:
>If you're not a lawyer, don't reply to this...too many people think
>they know the law and don't...

I'm not a lawyer, but I know enough about the law to know that
you can't stop me from replying.  :-)

>Last time I read legal theory, you were innocent until proven guilty
>beyond a reasonable shadow...and all that.
>
>Is it not incumbent upon Apple, in a suit, to prove that a clone-maker
>DID have access to the source, and not the responsability of the clone-
>maker to prove he didn't??  What am I missing here?

This is true in theory.  The problem is, you don't have to prove that
you have a case before you can sue.  It is quite possible for someone
with 'deep pockets' to sue, sue, sue, and sue, until the less
well-heeled victim is bankrupted by legal fees, and it doesn't make a
shred of difference how innocent the victim is.  Apple is one of the
major offenders in this particular kind of harrasment.  Nothing would
give me a bigger belly-laugh than to see them get bit back in a big way.
-- 
Mike Van Pelt                     Help stamp out Mickey-Mouse 
Headland Technology/Video 7          computer interfaces --
...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp            Menus are for Restaurants!