Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!cnn.nas.nasa.gov!lestat.nas.nasa.gov!thorpej From: thorpej@lestat.nas.nasa.gov (Jason R. Thorpe) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.misc Subject: Re: What is "BSD"? Date: 21 Aug 1995 06:41:03 GMT Organization: Just me. Lines: 37 Message-ID: <4199pv$skk@cnn.nas.nasa.gov> References: <CGD.95Aug20032937@BALVENIE.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: lestat.nas.nasa.gov X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: comp.unix.bsd.misc In article <CGD.95Aug20032937@BALVENIE.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU>, <cgd@cs.cmu.edu> wrote: [ Description of horrible act of malice and greed. ] >According to BSDI, _NONE_ of the following can be called "BSD Systems": > > Ultrix 386BSD > FreeBSD NetBSD > Lites SunOS [34].x > >even though some of them have been considered "BSD Systems" before BSDI >was formed. Indeed, systems like NetBSD or FreeBSD would find it >difficult (if not impossible) to register their names as trademarks, >without an agreement with BSDI like the ones that the FreeBSD folks >signed. ...and while there's probably enough gounds for claiming `common usage', it not like any of the `free OS' efforts listed above have the financial resources to defend themselves against a trademark infringement suit. The commercial flavors probably do, but DEC has had it's (very BSD-like) product branded `UNIX', and we all know that Sun no longer gives a rodent's keister about BSD anymore. I find it really hard to believe that BSDI didn't have this in mind all along. >Some of you may note that there's more than just a little bit of >irony in this... An understatement, indeed. I don't know how anyone involved with such an organization can stomach it. Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention, Chris. -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov> (Don't read anyting into that. I'm not speaking for anyone else.)