Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Golden Eagle
cc2k wrote:
In short, this probably wasn't even a trade secret in 1975. It is entirely possible that this code was copied by an AT&T engineer from a textbook or technical journal back in the early 1970's, and that it is not an original work of anyone at AT&T.
Golden Eagle replied:
Wild speculations certainly seem to be your specialty, if not this how the GPL servers possibly got hacked.
OK, I was speculating there, but only a little bit. I have personal, first hand knowledge that by 1981 all of the code on that slide that came from malloc() was common knowledge. I have several books that I didn't sign any NDA's to get that have that code in them. The earliest was copyrighted 1979 and the copyright was not AT&T or any predecessor in interest to TSG (The SCO Group).

There is no way that TSG can claim trade secret status on this or that IBM violated any license agreement requiring them to protect trade secrets. This code was common knowledge before IBM licensed UNIX SVR2 (or was it SVR3) from AT&T.

One issue that TSG is going to run into here is when you have a copyrighted work and you allow the copyright to be infringed over a long period of time, you lose your right to enforce that copyright. The actual legal requirements are somewhat arcane, but in the most basic terms, if the statute of limitations has run out on the first infringement, then IBM can stand up in court and say that AT&T (and TSG as a successor to TSG) failed to enforce their copyright against others (including the authors and publishers of the books I have) in a timely fashion, and by doing that they have waived their right to enforce the copyright forever. There's a legalese term for this that I can't recall right at the moment. IBM used the proper terminology for this in the "boilerplate" responses to TSG's original complaint.

cc2k wrote:
As far as this representing "infringement," I doubt that will stick.
Golden Eagle replied:
You're guessing again, but it may not matter if SCO can show that without their "official" release to copy this code, which may not have ever been explicitly granted, anyone who copied it did so illegally.
Well, Caldera, the company now doing business under the name "The SCO Group" and the one that filed the lawsuit against IBM released this code on January 23, 2002. The letter of license for that is available online at ftp://ftp.tribug.org/pub/tuhs/Caldera-license.pdf. Since you obviously didn't click the link in the original story, I'll put the text of that letter in this post.
240 West Center Street
Orem, Utah 84057
801-765-4999 Fax 801-765-4481

January 23, 2002

Dear UNIX. enthusiasts,

Caldera International, Inc. hereby grants a fee free license that includes the rights use, modify and distribute this named source code, including creating derived binary products created from the source code. The source code for which Caldera International, Inc. grants rights are limited to the following UNIX Operating Systems that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System, with specific exclusion of UNIX System III and UNIX System V and successor operating systems:

  • 32-bit 32V UNIX
  • 16 bit UNIX Versions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Caldera International, Inc. makes no guarantees or commitments that any source code is available from Caldera International, Inc. The following copyright notice applies to the source code files for which this license is granted.

Copyright(C) Caldera International Inc. 2001-2002. All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

Redistributions of source code and documentation must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement:

This product includes software developed or owned by Caldera International, Inc.

Neither the name of Caldera International, Inc. nor the names of other contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

USE OF THE SOFTWARE PROVIDED FOR UNDER THIS LICENSE BY CALDERA INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL CALDERA INTERNATIONAL, INC. BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

Very truly yours,

/signed/ Bill Broderick
Bill Broderick
Director, Licensing Services


* UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the US and other countries.
Prior to that, AT&T (under the name UNIX Systems Labs I think) released this particular code to BSD under the terms of the settlement with BSDI, and BSDI released the code as open source under the BSD license.
Golden Eagle wrote:
What your mistaken about is that they want to sue everyone involved, every end user, when actually they just want business customers to pay.
They want business customers to pay for something they no longer own and can't legally demand payment for. They also want business customers to pay The SCO Group a license fee for code written by IBM, Sequent (and probably SGI and others) that is copyrighted by IBM and Sequent. This is code that The SCO Group does not have a copyright to and that the SCO Group has no economic investment in the development costs, and they want businesses to pay the SCO Group a license fee for this code.

As one business user of Linux, I can say, when they can prove that they own something that I need to license, I'll consider paying the license (or I'll stop using their intellectual property). Until they prove it, they can go pound sand.

They also want IBM to pay them $1 billion to continue to use software that IBM developed and IBM copyrighted.

71 posted on 08/19/2003 4:52:53 PM PDT by cc2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: cc2k
I fail to see any relevance to that letter you and Danger are posting everywhere. It says clearly:

with specific exclusion of UNIX System III and UNIX System V and successor operating systems

80 posted on 08/19/2003 9:03:12 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson