[linux-elitists] quote of the day
Mon May 5 09:27:12 PDT 2003
On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 05:18:03PM +0100, Sean Neakums wrote:
> Ben Woodard <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > I heard McKusic go talk about the work that they had to go into to
> > prove what parts of BSD were not derived from Unix and it was an
> > extremely difficult process.
> But BSD was directly based on Unix until they rewrote the AT&T-owned
> code. It is not currently a given that there is Unix code in Linux,
> whereas it was in the BSD case, which seems to place the onus of proof
> differently in each situation.
Morally perhaps, but in a civil court case isn't the burden of proof is
on the defendant? (ie - presumed guilty until proven innocent?)
Just the opposite of a criminal case where the defendant is presumed
inncocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. email@example.com
copyright 2003. Use is restricted. Any use is an
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.
More information about the linux-elitists