bilbo@pnet02.cts.com (Bill Daggett) (03/22/88)
kuehn@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Jeffery A. Kuehn) writes: > >Can we drop the subject of pirating? Just for a month or so? PLEASE! It was dropped! I thought this was the month to discuss it? So, what do you want to discuss? :-) Bill UUCP: {ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax rutgers!marque}!gryphon!pnet02!bilbo INET: bilbo@pnet02.cts.com
arthur@pnet02.cts.com (Arthur L. Rubin) (03/23/88)
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 discovered, a copy of a computer program could be prosecuted for copyright violation if the owner cannot produce an "offical" copy. Arthur L. Rubin ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4519 Richard Drive Los Angeles, CA 90032-1227 Phone: (213)221-5033 (home w/o answering machine) Phone: (213)221-1962 (home) MCI Mail: ARUBIN 216-5888 Telex (WUI/MCI): 6502165888 "6502165888 MCI" CompuServe: 70707,453 DELPHI: RUNNINGTRTLE UUCP: [ ihnp4 hplabs!hp-sdd sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!gryphon!pnet02!arthur ARPA: crash!gryphon!pnet02!arthur@nosc INET: arthur@pnet02.cts.com Arthur L. Rubin 4519 Richard Drive Los Angeles, CA 90032-1227 Phone: (213)221-5033 (home w/o answering machine) Phone: (213)221-1962 (home) MCI Mail: ARUBIN 216-5888 Telex (WUI/MCI): 6502165888 "6502165888 MCI" CompuServe: 70707,453 DELPHI: RUNNINGTRTLE UUCP: [ ihnp4 hplabs!hp-sdd sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!gryphon!pnet02!arthur ARPA: crash!gryphon!pnet02!arthur@nosc INET: arthur@pnet02.cts.com
zgel05@apctrc.UUCP (George E. Lehmann) (03/24/88)
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.
khill@home.csc.ti.com (Ken Hill - Patents) (04/07/88)
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 .discovered, a copy of a computer program could be prosecuted for copyright .violation if the owner cannot produce an "offical" copy. .Arthur L. Rubin . Computer based records can be entered, as long as certain ground rules are observed. They can be entered to prove that the information they contain is actually true, if they fall within an exception to the hearsay rule. For example, business records kept in the normal course of business, when introduced and authenticated by a custodian, can be so used. They may also be used against a party to refute something they said, or to show merely that they have an illegal copy, etc. In any case, all records must be properly authenticated, but this is not much more difficult than for other kinds of documents. For example, here in Dallas, two engineers were convicted of theft of trade secrets when tapes full of software taken from their previous employer were found at their new employer, and it was shown that the software had been loaded onto the new employer's system. There are no typos. If you think you saw one, see an opthamolo... optaha... ophthamal... eye doctor. Ken Hill {convex!smu, texsun,im4u,seismo!ut-sally!im4u}!ti-csl!khill