So according to you and others, Linux is a true UNIX derivative because it has UNIX code in it. Also with that definition EVERY *nix these these days is in essence derived from that code because it mimics the functionality and interface. In general, this is the definition of a "UNIX-like" operating system.
OSX is certified UNIX now too.
There's the word, "certified," which requires zero AT&T UNIX heritage, only functionality. Linux could be certified too (it's pretty much compliant), except that Torvalds changes it so much any certified version would already be outdated. Wouldn't that just piss you off, Linux certified true UNIX™.
Sure they do, but BSD was "Unix" before they even existed, and trademarking the name isn't going to stop it from being generally referenced as such.
You're jumping all over the place in this one post. The first second sentences you said derivation makes UNIX. The third you said it's certification. Now you're talking the vernacular (what it would be generally referenced as) that covers anything UNIX-like.
Simple to most, you'll no doubt still be confused though.
You are trying to confuse by jumping all around, but it's not working.
You’re getting Unix and Posix confused now. Unix and Linux both conform to Posix standards, but doesn’t mean they are the same family of operating systems, they are clear and distinct subsets within the Posix family.
And while the current owners of the Unix trademark possibly would be willing to prostitute it out to a foreign clone like Linux for a few pieces of gold, they haven’t yet nor do they have any plans to, so once again you’re just trying to muddy the waters rather than admit Unix is the American original and Linux is the foreign clone, but facts are facts and you’ll have to live with them.