Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site circadia.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!circadia!dave
From: dave@circadia.UUCP (David Messer)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: more parties
Message-ID: <142@circadia.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Mar-85 01:21:47 EST
Article-I.D.: circadia.142
Posted: Wed Mar 27 01:21:47 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Mar-85 01:55:24 EST
References: <9452@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: Quest Research Inc., Burnsville, MN
Lines: 30

> To put it another way, the most important link is between A and B,
> where A (the owner of the info) disclosed information to B under license.
> If B gives the information to C and it gets to D, E and so on, the
> information will still probably be considered to be protected, since
> A was not at fault in the disclosure process.

As I understand it, A must also be diligent in prosecuting B for
the violation; otherwise the information might be considered
public-domain (if it is generally known in the field).  I suspect
that at the very least, A would have to prove the path back to
B in order to get any compensation.

> Admittedly, this all gets very complex and can result in 
> exceedingly lengthy and expensive court cases, injunctions,
> and things that go bump in the night.
> 
> --Lauren--

Thats why lawyers make the laws the way they do... :-)


-------
Note:  I am not professionally qualified to have any opinion on
	   this subject; I am not a lawyer, no one in my family is
	   one, and I don't hang out with them.  Use my opinions
	   at your own risk.

-- 

Dave Messer   ...ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!circadia!dave