HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Sunday, 24 Jan 1993 20:01:24 EST
From: <RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,soc.men,soc.women,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Sexual Discrimination
 <C1DrGF.LK6@ddsw1.mcs.com>

-If you get a few victories in a few states then women will be put on notice
-that we are not going to stop until we have equality in the bedroom.  Then,
-perhaps, the feminists will decide to join with us and <reform> the
-reproductive freedom issue entirely.  Perhaps, seeing the force which can be
-mustered, this can be turned into much more than just "fathers rights" -- it
-can become the "equal rights" reproductive proposals that I, and many other
-men, would love to see come to pass.
-
-I, even though I am not a father, am willing to put up $100 to the
-organization which spearheads these lawsuits across all 50 states.  If
-every NCP does this as well there will be millions of dollars available
-for these cases.  If we could get every MAN to put up $10.00 there would
-be nearly a billion dollars available for these cases.
-
-I like this idea.  Let's go for it.
-
---
-Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
-Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900]

  I agree.  I am also in a similar position, I AM a father, but my younger
child is already 19 so I am not really affected.  Nonetheless, I am ALSO
willing to put up a $100/-  to see that men have equal rights in this
important area.

Rohit Parikh

Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
From: vpoy@terapin.com (Vincent Poy)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:35:28 PST
Organization: BBS

In article <1jvior$spo@agate.berkeley.edu>, payam@landau.Berkeley.EDU (Payam
Mirrashidi) writes:
>In article <vpoy.3f6k@terapin.com> vpoy@terapin.com (Vincent Poy) writes:
>>What was that that someone said about Windows NT having UNIX compatibility?
Can
>
>>someone provide full details on it like what UNIX standards is it going to be
>>compatible with and also if it is capable of running all TCP/IP clients and
>>daemons?
>>
>
>From my understanding NT will not be a UNIX compatible system. In fact, it
>isn't a multiuser system at all. But it is claimed that when it is
commercially
>released it will be POSIX compatible. That's something totally different than
>being UNIX compatible. NT will be great improvement for people using DOS but
>it won't be useful to people who need the multiuser environment that UNIX
>provides.
>
>See the February '93 issue of UNIXWorld for a decent review of NT. The
>whole issue is dedicated to what NT means to the UNIX world.
>
>
>-- 
>Payam Mirrashidi                  payam@langmuir.Berkeley.EDU
>
>"I've seen this happen in other people's lives,
>       now its happening in mine" - The Smiths
Thanks! Just wondered if I can use it to connect to the InterNet!
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:12:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.221304.11440@bcars6a8.bnr.ca>, jsparkes@bcars68a.bnr.ca (Jeff Sparkes) writes:
| USL could be talking about a much higher percentage. These numbers don't
| give enough detail....  Maybe lines of code or percentages of files 
| "stolen" would be a better count.

But Heck!  This lawsuit is looking sillier and sillier.  There may not be
much detail in those figures, but it is still obvious that they are griping
about a *very small percentage* of the code.  As in relatively easy to rewrite
using your favorite ``clean'' technique.  If this report is anywhere *near*
being true, why doesn't the judge require them to settle on that basis?  This
is like claiming infringement for using the word ``the'' from the Gettysburg
address.

Unless they are claiming that it is *impossible* to write *any* unix kernel
that doesn't infringe...

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
From: drs0587@europa.tamu.edu (Dave Safford)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Softwa
Date: 27 Jan 1993 15:18:56 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University
Distribution: world
Reply-To: drs0587@europa.tamu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: europa.tamu.edu

In article 8133@igor.tamri.com, jbass@igor.tamri.com (John Bass) writes:

>it was frankly obvious that much of it was:
>
>	1) derived from the AT&T copyrighted puesdo code in Bach's
>	   "The Design of the UNIX Operating System" (see clock interrupt
>	    routine plus the other files that DIRECTLY reference pages
>	    from Bach).
>
>	2) Direct modification & re-write of AT&T source, complete with
>	   original UNIX subroutine and variable names. Some times you
>	   find they were just to lazy to remove/re-write UNIX code so
>	   they simply deleted the UNIX code and left the comment:
>Both practices are clear copyright violations.

Hmm... 
1. Bach documented V.2/V.3, which contained *much* code from BSD 4.1/4.2.
   Some of Bach's pseudo code (certainly ALL of the network stuff) was
   derived/copied from code that originated at Berkeley. Are you saying 
   that this is now under AT&T copyright, and unavailable to BSD??? 
   Just because the code references Bach does not necessarily mean the 
   concepts or code came from AT&T.
2. The function stubs may have been derived from open sources, such as Bach.
   
I don't think it is *clear* that they violated copyright.
The relationships of code developed at AT&T and Berkeley is quite
complex, as in the good old days people cooperated rather than litigated.
Let's let the courts decide before going off on such tirades.
I certainly wouldn't hire anyone that has your tendency to presume an entire 
group of people guilty without proof.

dave safford


Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Date: 28 Jan 93 18:30:08 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing Sciences

In article <vpoy.3igi@terapin.com>, vpoy@terapin.com (Vincent Poy) writes:

|> Thanks! Just wondered if I can use it to connect to the InterNet!

What does UNIX compatability or the OS in general have to do with connecting
to the INTERNET??  I would guess there are more PC's running DOS with INTERNET
access today than anything else.

bill

-- 

   Bill Gunshannon     | "There are no evil thoughts, Mr. Reardon" Francisco
   bill@cs.uofs.edu    |  said softly, "except one; the refusal to think."
                       |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   
Xref: sparky alt.suit.att-bsdi:844 comp.org.eff.talk:9243 comp.unix.bsd:11817 comp.unix.wizards:5650 comp.org.usenix:1388
From: lile@netcom.com (Lile Elam)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.wizards,comp.org.usenix
Subject: Re: BSDI/USL Lawsuit -- More Bad News for Human Beings...
Date: 26 Jan 93 03:56:39 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:

>"Oh, you went to the University of Foo, and took the Compilers class? 
> <checking list> Sorry, but you were exposed to Unix source code; we 
> can't hire you."


Gosh. It almost sounds like descrimination of someone who has aids. 
But then, aids is really serious and I probably shouldn't use the
comparison.  Though I feel that the above is pretty serious too.


-lile

-- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lile Elam	    |  "Remember... No matter where you go, there you are."
lile@netcom.com     |		
Un*x Admin / Artist |			 Buckaroo Banzai
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Date: 27 Jan 93 03:03:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Ditka Policy Institute

In article <1993Jan26.221218.8133@igor.tamri.com> jbass@igor.tamri.com (John Bass) writes:
>I think hiring managers should be boycot hiring UCB grads until they clean
>up their act on plagiarism and require all existing students to attend a
>class on intelectual property rights.
>
>I also think that all faculty, staff, and student assistants that participated
>and/or condoned this piracy should be removed or severely disciplined.

I think maybe we should wait to see how the case turns out before deciding
what to do.   At this point, it is at best unclear who did what to who when,  
so calls for punitive measures seem rather premature...especially since
we don't know who'll be on the receiving end of those measures just yet.

In the interim, I'll give UCB grads the same consideration in hiring that
I give to everyone else; to do any less would be unfair.

"Condoning this piracy", by the way, is not a legal infraction.  One's
1st Amendment rights allow one to condone even the most heinous crimes
without penalty.  Of course, such opinions may be unpopular, but those
are the very sorts of opinions that the 1st Amendment was intended
to protect.

---Rsk
From: payam@landau.Berkeley.EDU (Payam Mirrashidi)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Date: 25 Jan 1993 02:20:11 GMT
Organization: The Plasma Theory and Simulation Group, UC Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: landau.berkeley.edu

In article <vpoy.3f6k@terapin.com> vpoy@terapin.com (Vincent Poy) writes:
>What was that that someone said about Windows NT having UNIX compatibility? Can
>someone provide full details on it like what UNIX standards is it going to be
>compatible with and also if it is capable of running all TCP/IP clients and
>daemons?
>

From my understanding NT will not be a UNIX compatible system. In fact, it
isn't a multiuser system at all. But it is claimed that when it is commercially
released it will be POSIX compatible. That's something totally different than
being UNIX compatible. NT will be great improvement for people using DOS but
it won't be useful to people who need the multiuser environment that UNIX
provides.

See the February '93 issue of UNIXWorld for a decent review of NT. The
whole issue is dedicated to what NT means to the UNIX world.


-- 
Payam Mirrashidi                  payam@langmuir.Berkeley.EDU

"I've seen this happen in other people's lives,
	now its happening in mine" - The Smiths
From: howard@hasse.hal.com (Howard Gayle)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Date: 22 Jan 1993 15:50:21 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc., Campbell, California
Reply-To: howard@hal.com (Howard Gayle)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hasse.hal.com
Summary: Science News & Comment article.

The News & Comment section of Science has an article about the
lawsuit:

Title	UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
FullAuthor	John Travis
Journal	Science
Day	15
Month	Jan
Year	1993
Pages	304-305
Volume	259
Number	5093

I think it's a good 1.5 page summary of the background and
issues.  The inaccuracies are minor.  Key quote:

   "`We have done a very thorough analysis of the [NET2] source
   code and found very direct copying...,' says [USL director
   of corporate relations Larry] Lytle.  Specifically, USL now
   claims that more than 100 files, out of the more than 8000
   in NET2, have code stolen from UNIX.  `I think it will be
   obvious to the court that they copied our kernel...,' says
   Sanford Tannebaum, a vice president for USL."
--
Howard Gayle
HAL Computer Systems, Inc.
1315 Dell Avenue
Campbell, California 95008
USA
howard@hal.com
Phone: +1 408 379 7000 extension 1080
FAX  : +1 408 379 5022
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:15:48 GMT

In article <1jp53tINN4bl@hal.com>, howard@hasse.hal.com (Howard Gayle) writes:

| [USL director of corporate relations Larry] Lytle [...] claims that more
| than 100 files, out of the more than 8000 in NET2, have code 
| stolen [sic] from UNIX.

So.  They claim that a *maximum* of 1.25% of the code was ``stolen'', and
since they say ``have [some] code stolen'', it probably means that the
only a fraction of these modules bears any similarity to the v32 code.
Let's be generous and say that 0.5% of the code has any real similarity.

And they think this is a strong case?

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
From: sfreed@lacerta.unm.edu (Steve Freed)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Date: 25 Jan 1993 18:06:53 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
NNTP-Posting-Host: lacerta.unm.edu

In article <1jvior$spo@agate.berkeley.edu> payam@landau.Berkeley.EDU (Payam Mirrashidi) writes:
>From my understanding NT will not be a UNIX compatible system...
> ...But it is claimed that when it is commercially
>released it will be POSIX compatible. That's something totally different than
                           ^^^^^^^^^^

I believe the word you are looking for is "complient". There is no "POSIX OS",
just a standards paper which your OS may comply with, in whole or in part.



-- 

Steve.                    sfreed@ariel.unm.edu
From: cudep@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Date: 28 Jan 1993 17:26:46 -0000
Organization: Team Limpid's Meathead With Aptitude - Kunst und Wahnsinn
NNTP-Posting-Host: spatula.csv.warwick.ac.uk

In article <vpoy.3igi@terapin.com> vpoy@terapin.com (Vincent Poy) writes:
>In article <1jvior$spo@agate.berkeley.edu>, payam@landau.Berkeley.EDU (Payam
>Mirrashidi) writes:
>>See the February '93 issue of UNIXWorld for a decent review of NT. The
>>whole issue is dedicated to what NT means to the UNIX world.

Which is one reason why UnixWorld isn't as good mag as it used to be.
OpenSystemsToday (ex UnixToday) went the same way.
Similarly, EurOpen (ex EUUG) aren't the same beast they used to be.

Some people say it's cos people like me are behind the times.
I say's it's cos people like them are turning into corporate brownnosers
who've forgotten who got them where they are today.

>Thanks! Just wondered if I can use it to connect to the InterNet!

You'd better plan to write some nice authentication software since NotThere
is a single user OS. :-)

Cheers,
-- 
\/ato - Ian Dickinson - NIC handle: ID17                   No-one is to molest
vato@csv.warwick.ac.uk  ...!mcsun!uknet!warwick!vato           the wombat when
/I=I/S=Dickinson/OU=CSV/O=Warwick/PRMD=UK.AC/ADMD= /C=GB/            anyone is
@c=GB@o=University of Warwick@ou=Computing Services@cn=Ian Dickinson  watching.
From: vpoy@terapin.com (Vincent Poy)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Windows NT
Date: 23 Jan 93 19:57:16 PST
Organization: BBS

What was that that someone said about Windows NT having UNIX compatibility? Can
someone provide full details on it like what UNIX standards is it going to be
compatible with and also if it is capable of running all TCP/IP clients and
daemons?

Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: peltz@cerl.uiuc.edu (Steve Peltz)
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Organization: Computer Based Education Research Lab - University of Illinois
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:32:57 GMT

Of course, how many of those files include a big long copyright notice,
followed by one #define or #include...or are programs about as complex
as hello.c (the non-gnu-programming-standards version, that is), where
the obvious way of writing it is trivial. I mean, my vanilla strcmp()
implementation is probably going to be pretty similar to theirs, along
with a whole bunch of diddly utility functions in the standard libraries.
-- 
Steve Peltz
Internet: peltz@cerl.uiuc.edu	PLATO/NovaNET: peltz/s/cerl
From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Date: 28 Jan 93 18:28:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Department of Computing Sciences

In article <1993Jan26.191232.28187@rwwa.COM>, witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow) writes:
|> 
|> Unless they are claiming that it is *impossible* to write *any* unix kernel
|> that doesn't infringe...
|> 

You mean like Kodak is claiming for photo-CD???

I am not surprised by the claims made by any major corporation any more.
We will have to see what the courts decide.  And that, unfotunately, is
not likely to be based on sound technical points as much as which lawyer
is more eloquent.

bill

-- 

   Bill Gunshannon     | "There are no evil thoughts, Mr. Reardon" Francisco
   bill@cs.uofs.edu    |  said softly, "except one; the refusal to think."
                       |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: jsparkes@bcars68a.bnr.ca (Jeff Sparkes)
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Embroiled in Computer Software Lawsuit
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:13:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.221548.24252@rwwa.COM> witr@rwwa.com writes:
>In article <1jp53tINN4bl@hal.com>, howard@hasse.hal.com (Howard Gayle) writes:
>
>| [USL director of corporate relations Larry] Lytle [...] claims that more
>| than 100 files, out of the more than 8000 in NET2, have code 
>| stolen [sic] from UNIX.
>
>So.  They claim that a *maximum* of 1.25% of the code was ``stolen'', and
>since they say ``have [some] code stolen'', it probably means that the
>only a fraction of these modules bears any similarity to the v32 code.
>Let's be generous and say that 0.5% of the code has any real similarity.
>
>And they think this is a strong case?

The 8000 and 100 are from the entire NET2 release.  How many files are for
the kernel, and how many of that 100 are in that subset.  USL could be
talking about a much higher percentage.   These numbers don't give enough
detail....  Maybe lines of code or percentages of files "stolen" would be a
better count.

Disclaimer: I am not on the USL side, I just hate to see the "facts"
abused.
--
--
Jeff Sparkes jsparkes@bnr.ca	Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa (613)765-2503
You know, a muffin can be *very* filling.
Newsgroups: alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom)
Subject: Re: BSDI/USL Lawsuit -- More Bad News for Human Beings...
Organization: Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 06:13:47 GMT

Much as I hate to agree with Barry Shein on anything :-) ...

I am not a programmer - rather, I am a user of Unix boxes.  I have used
and written cheap hacks and ported C.A.D. tools to BSD boxes for years,
and have used an SVR4 386 box for about one year, and BSDI for a few
months.

Okay, so I damaged my brain with all that BSD stuff - I admit it.  In
any case, I now have both a BSDI machine and a ESIX machine running,
and I like working in the BSDI environment a HELL of a lot more (in spite
of a few bits, like a good vi, that BSDI hasn't come up with yet).  
SVR4 claims to have BSD "enhancements" - well, putting a BSD sheepskin
on an SVR3 wolf doesn't tame it any.

The SVR4 version I got, ESIX 4.0.3, was buggy as hell - and that
was after ESIX got done fixing a bunch of stuff.  Perhaps Solaris is
better - I can't imagine Sun allowing that much poorly tested garbage
out the door.  No slam on ESIX intended, BTW;  they did pretty good
considering what they started with.

Having access to the source is a plus - while I can't write code worth
beans, I can see a bug and report one, or ask a friend for help.  If
the original programmer is one of those marginal individuals who can't
write man pages but can at least comment a line or two, I can figure 
out what a program is supposed to do, even if it isn't correctly documented. 
Many times I have had to look at the chunk of code generating an error
message to figure out what was wrong with my input file.  Unless they are
breeding better programmers these days, source will always be needed.

I know there are a lot of "hobby" Unixes around - me, I would rather 
pay money to a company to buy a clean, supported product, as long as it
is based on an Intel/ISA/open architecture (which I don't have to
justify here, thank you very much!).  I want something that will
compile BSD sources without a burp.  I want something with some
history to it.  As near as I can tell, the only available option
is BSDI, and if that goes away, I am mildly screwed.

If USL wants to offer a real, clean BSD port as a separate product,
debugged and documented so well that I never need to look at the 
source, I may moderate my support for companies such as BSDI.  But when
craftsmanship falls victim to legal harassment, I will tend to side
with the craftsmen.

Keith
-- 
Keith Lofstrom         keithl@klic.rain.com       Voice (503)-520-1993
KLIC --- Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits --- "Your Ideas in Silicon"
Design Contracting in Bipolar and CMOS - Analog, Digital, and Power ICs
Newsgroups: alt.test
From: allin1@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg
Subject: ignore this
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:25:53 GMT



;lakjsdf
;l'aksdfj

Newsgroups: alt.test
From: an7413@anon.penet.fi
Subject: no reply
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: alt.test
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:17:00 GMT

test


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Newsgroups: alt.test
From: twalsh@trl.oz.au (Terry Walsh)
Subject: TEST ONLY
Keywords: N/A
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 22:02:38 GMT

This is a test only to see if I'm getting through to y'all.	

Terry Walsh
From: lee@bigvax.alfred.edu (Mike Lee)
Newsgroups: alt.test
Subject: bigvax Return Address Test: ignore
Date: 28 Jan 93 00:32:51 GMT
Reply-To: lee@bigvax.alfred.edu



--
You know what would make a good story?  Something about a clown 
who makes people happy, but inside he's real sad.  Also, he has 
severe diarrhea.

                         Jack Handy

lee@bigvax.alfred.edu
From: phudx@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr N A Bullett)
Newsgroups: alt.test
Subject: TEST
Date: 21 Jan 93 23:57:16 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, University of Warwick, UK
NNTP-Posting-Host: anise.csv.warwick.ac.uk

Just a test. :)
Newsgroups: alt.test
From: crosen@sss.cba.ua.edu (Charles Rosen)
Subject: testing
Summary: A test of tests
Keywords: test,test,test,test,test,test
Organization: Systems Support Services, University of Alabama
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 04:18:39 GMT

This is a test of e-mail.  Remember had this been an actual posting you 
would have been notified.
From: bl971@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (J. Edwin Ball)
Newsgroups: alt.test
Subject: Test message
Date: 22 Jan 1993 01:13:20 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bl971@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (J. Edwin Ball)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


I'm trying to post to USENET.  Could someone tell me how to from here?

Newsgroups: alt.test