Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!news.hawaii.edu!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!mips!sdd.hp.com!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!world!ksr!jfw From: jfw@ksr.com (John F. Woods) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: UNIGRAM's article on the USL-BSDI suit Message-ID: <14551@ksr.com> Date: 6 Aug 92 13:45:02 EDT References: <25138@dog.ee.lbl.gov> <1992Aug3.143259.23897@crd.ge.com> <1992Aug4.212819.19417@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> <1992Aug05.150156.1019@NeoSoft.com> <1992Aug6.140100.5815@crd.ge.com> Sender: news@ksr.com Lines: 11 davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) writes: > I wouldn't accept USL's word for it (and don't), but I would rather >have a third party form an opinion than spend year's in court, and try >to educate a jury enough to be able to understand the issues, let alone >decide them. The problem is ensuring that the third party knows what "similar because of infringement" and "similar because of functional necessity" are; if USL is allowed to pick the ground rules that the third party will follow, "has a file system" could be grounds for saying "they copied it"... Presumably part of the court battle will be to draw the line.