The whole AT&T/UNIX Systems Labs/Novell v. BSDI thing is completely settled. But it's sealed, Nick Danger just said. So you really don't know what it says for sure, right?
fair use doctrine...
It doesn't allow book publishers to give IP to others for reprint though, which is a better analogy to what happened here.
You heard wrong. There's nothing in that license that would exclude code covered by that license from being released under the GPL.
The key is "that licensce", being a BST-"type" when referring to Calderra releases, right?
Gotta run. Have fun defending Linux, since this is just the start.
So you claim to see nothing, noth-ink!
Dude, you have to at least admit this is interesting evidence. You can't hope to completely stonewall, refusing to even see the damaging evidence here posted. That outs you completely (as if everyone didn't already have your number, which they clearly do).
That kind of blind loyalty to the cause only serves to prove you're a biased advocate. If you're going to use this screen name to pretend you're just an uninvolved person posting his opinion, you have to at least pretend you see the evidence that isn't favorable. Blind denial only makes you the (further) object of our entertainment!