Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:16599 comp.sys.ibm.pc:13626 comp.sys.apple:4854 comp.sys.cbm:1253 comp.sys.atari.8bit:1352 comp.sys.atari.st:8563 comp.sys.att:2853
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!apctrc!zgel05
From: zgel05@apctrc.UUCP (George E. Lehmann)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.atari.8bit,comp.sys.atari.st,comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: pirating, etc.
Message-ID: <464@apctrc.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 88 21:22:21 GMT
References: <2969@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Reply-To: zgel05@apctrc.UUCP (George E. Lehmann)
Organization: Amoco Production Co, Tulsa Research Center
Lines: 17

In article <2969@gryphon.CTS.COM> arthur@pnet02.cts.com (Arthur L. Rubin) writes:
>kudla@pawl20.pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) writes:
>>...Also, like an audio recording, any 
>>computer-based record cannot be used as evidence in a court of law.
>This is news to me.  Can any lawyers confirm or deny.  It seems to me that, if

Last year, in mod.risks, several reports about an individual in England being
prosecuted for planting a "time-bomb" in a software system indicated the judge
had ruled inadmissable a number of computer records because they had not been
properly stored away.  This implies that had the police there properly locked
up the evidence (backup tapes in this instance) to insure against their being
altered, that they would have been admissable as evidence...

-- 
George Lehmann,  ...!uunet!apctrc!zgel05
Amoco Production Co., PO BOX 3385, Tulsa, Ok  74102  ph:918-660-4066
Standard Disclaimer: Contents are my responsibility, not AMOCO's.