Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!news.hawaii.edu!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!rutgers!ub!csn!raven!rcd From: rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: UNIGRAM's article on the USL-BSDI suit Summary: comparing the code isn't enough Message-ID: <1992Aug5.231650@eklektix.com> Date: 5 Aug 92 23:16:50 GMT References: <KANDALL.92Aug5175428@globalize.nsg.sgi.com> <15o75lINNfi9@agate.berkeley.edu> <25238@dog.ee.lbl.gov> Organization: eklektix - Boulder, Colorado Lines: 18 torek@horse.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek) writes: [discussion of "UNIX family tree"] >In any case, many of the things that make UNIX `commercial-grade' software >(this phrase is actually something of a put-down :-) ) today owe their >existence to CSRG. Examples include: ....[some key examples, by no means all of CSRG's contributions]... >What does this mean in terms of the suit? Not much, actually; further >speculation is pointless until we see more details. I think the additions to UNIX drawn from CSRG work *are* relevant to one particular issue: the idea that comparing BSD and USL code would tell whether there has been infringement. If you find a strong resemblance between code in SVR4 and code in Net 2, it's probably because the SVR4 code is derived from BSD work. For a comparison to make sense, you've got to go back to 32V and compare *that* to Net 2. -- Dick Dunn rcd@raven.eklektix.com -or- raven!rcd Boulder, Colorado ...I'm not cynical - just experienced.