At this point, the document (which was sealed) does not have to say anything. Upon obtaining this settlement — whatever was in it... we don't even have to know — the University of California promptly released all the BSD code under what is now called the "BSD license."
It's been nine years now. Neither AT&T, nor Novell, nor the Santa Cruz Operation, nor even Caldera/SCO until very recently, objected. The doctrines of laches and waivers say that if none of these original or subsequent owners of the AT&T code base has complained in nine years about this code being openly available under the BSD license, then they have waived any rights they might have had to the BSD code, even if they now change their mind.
DOCTRINE OF LACHES Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition. Laches/laechaz/leychez/laeshez/. "Doctrine of laches" is based upon maxim that equity aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights. It is defined as neglect to assert a right or claim which, taken together with lapse of time and other circumstances causing prejudice to adverse party, operates as bar in court of equity.
Whether SCO likes it or not, the behavior of the previous owners over the past 9 years contitutes a waiver of just the sort of rights SCO wishes it could now claim. The world assumed that the U of C was acting in good faith in releasing the code, no one objected for many years, and in the interim huge investments have been made in the belief that this code was available under the terms that the U of C said it was.
No one can claim that AT&T, Novell, or the Santa Cruz Operation were incompetent to act on their own behalf, or were restrained in any way from asserting any rights they wished to assert. They did not do so.
It is reasonable to assume that the settlement reached in the court case gave the U of C the legal right to release the code as it did, and that this is why there was no objection from AT&T/USL/Novell. But even if the settlement doesn't say that, after nine years it's too late to complain.
What? It didn't get put into Linux but until just a couple of years ago, so the lawsuit seems very timely. SCO does not consider U of C 'competition' in the enterprise server market, despite what BSD people might tell you. Once SCO's business territory got invaded, and they found the alleged theft, they litigated.