*BSD News Article 8864


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,alt.suit.att-bsdi
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!cheops!pclink
From: pclink@cheops.qld.tne.oz.au (Rick)
Subject: Re: AT&T/USL CD-ROM Review Process
Message-ID: <1992Dec15.033540.483@cheops.qld.tne.oz.au>
Organization: Telecom Australia, TNE Computer Support Services
References: <1ge0aaINNm4d@neuro.usc.edu> <1992Dec13.165418.5021@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1992Dec13.183240.23944@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> <1992Dec14.165913.6896@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 03:35:40 GMT
Lines: 17

terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes:

>Second, Linux is arguably more like SVR3 (and by extension SVR4) than
>386BSD; this, I believe, puts it in more danger of censure.  The thing
>that has protected Linux so far is its international (non-US) origin.
>This is not something USL has to worry about forever, it's simply an
>inconvenience to prosecution, not a barrier.  If a judgement were given
>regarding copyright infringement by Linux against USL's materials, it
>wouldn't matter that the judgement occurred in the US; Linus' government
>would be forced by the Berne convention to uphold the judgement.

Forgive my density, but prosecution under what grounds?  It's my
understanding that Linus has written Linux from scratch (with a leg-up
from Minix).  Surely Andrew Tannenbaum would have more grounds for copyright
infringement than USL?

Rick.