Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #912Re: AT&T USL vs. BSDI/UCB, Mach3, OSF/1, GNU HURD, Linux
From: Piercarlo Grandi
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1992 23:07
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1992 23:07
48 lines
2864 bytes
2864 bytes
On 5 Sep 92 20:24:56 GMT, jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) said: NNTP-Posting-Host: ohm.berkeley.edu jbuck> (Piercarlo Grandi) writes: pcg> If I were USL I would sue Microsoft over Windows NT rather than UCB pcg> over BSD, as Windows NT looks a much more terrible competitor to pcg> SVR4 than BSDI. Unless USL is suing BSDI/UCB as the easier target, pcg> to establish a precedent, and having done that ... jbuck> BSDI alone, as a small startup, would be an easy target, but the jbuck> University of California has billions in assets and a big jbuck> full-time legal staff. Not an easy target at all; it will cost jbuck> USL big money. Not to mention that by suing the Regents, USL is jbuck> suing Pete Wilson, Willie Brown, Leo McCarthy, and every major jbuck> politician and many of the major millionaires in California. jbuck> I heard comments from one UC lawyer that sounded like she wanted jbuck> to pursue a very aggressive strategy, Ah, this gives a lot of hope. It's surely better than CMU's decision not to take risks, and avoid getting sued, at least for now. Usually Universities have a strong inclination not to make trouble for themselves, and cave in with powerful corporation and potential sponsors. But maybe after all it is the university of *California*. jbuck> disputing USL's ownership of Unix itself, given all the major jbuck> contributions from Berkeley and elsewhere. I doubt this strategy is tenable. Part of the educational UNIX source license are clauses that state: 1) all work done by the licensee with UNIX must be supplied free of charge to any other UNIX source licensee. 2) all work done by the licensee *on* UNIX (the kernel) becomes the intellectual property of the licensor, AT&T/USL. While 1) is OK (and vaguely reminiscent of the GPL in its details), 2) might well mean that USL is going to argue that the entire BSD (and Mach1/2/3, probably) kernel is theirs exclusively. That would be bad news indeed. -- Piercarlo Grandi | JNET: pcg@uk.ac.aber Dept of CS, University of Wales | UUCP: ...!aber-cs!pcg Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@aber.ac.uk
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<PCG.92Sep9230720@aberdb.aber.ac.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!gdt!aber!aberfa!pcgReferences:
<PCG.92Aug30225902@aberdb.aber.ac.uk> <37649@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> <PCG.92Sep5151041@aberdb.aber.ac.uk> <18b52oINNicr@agate.berkeley.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!gdt!aber!aberfa!pcg From: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.mach Subject: Re: AT&T USL vs. BSDI/UCB, Mach3, OSF/1, GNU HURD, Linux Message-ID: <PCG.92Sep9230720@aberdb.aber.ac.uk> Date: 9 Sep 92 23:07:20 GMT References: <PCG.92Aug30225902@aberdb.aber.ac.uk> <37649@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> <PCG.92Sep5151041@aberdb.aber.ac.uk> <18b52oINNicr@agate.berkeley.edu> Sender: news@aber.ac.uk (USENET news service) Reply-To: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) Organization: Prifysgol Cymru, Aberystwyth Lines: 48 In-Reply-To: jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu's message of 5 Sep 92 20: 24:56 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: aberdb