Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?

• Subject: Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?
• From: cor@xs4all.nl (Cor Bosman)
• Date: 6 Jan 1996 02:13:42 GMT
• Distribution: inet
• Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk, comp.security.unix, comp.security.misc, misc.legal.computing, comp.sys.intel
• Organization: XS4ALL, networking for the masses
• References: <4ck88a$8o2@hecate.umd.edu>
• Xref: nntp.teleport.com comp.org.eff.talk:69044 comp.security.unix:23533 comp.security.misc:24524 misc.legal.computing:18625 comp.sys.intel:71091

ram@mbisgi.umd.edu (Ram Samudrala) writes:

>The system of law fails for this very reason: it generalises far too
>much.  Who was the victim in this case?

Randal ofcourse.

Cor
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Cor Bosman     |  ____Xs4all Public Access____  |  tel: +31-(0)20-622-2885 |
| cor@xs4all.net |     Network Administrator      |  fax: +31-(0)20-622-2753 |
-------------The building is clear, Leisa has crossed the bridge-------SP6----

• Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?
• From: adt@netcom.com (Anthony D. Tribelli)

• Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?
• From: ram@mbisgi.umd.edu (Ram Samudrala)

• Prev: Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?
• Next: Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?
• Index: Mail Index
• Thread: Mail Thread Index