🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2928@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> jgd@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (John G Dobnick,EMS E380,4142295727,) writes:
>
>I gather that Mac clones are immenent.  This brouhaha seems to put a 
>severe legal damper on release of such clones -- the clonemakers will 
>now have to prove they *didn't* have access to Apple source.  I see the
>potential for nasty copyright battles, possibly putting "look and feel"
>to shame.
>

If you're not a lawyer, don't reply to this...too many people think
they know the law and don't...

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?

In any case, is it not true that companies like Chips and Technologies
have established precident that it IS possible to clone something exactly
(bug-for-bug) without access to proprietary material?

	...ken seefried iii
	   ken@gatech.edu
	ken seefried iii	...!{akgua, allegra, amd, harpo, hplabs, 
	ken@gatech.edu		masscomp, rlgvax, sb1, uf-cgrl, unmvax,
	                      ut-ngp, ut-sally}!gatech!ken