From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Novell buys Unix Systems Laboratory
Organization: The World
	<BZS.92Dec22231804@world.std.com>
	<1992Dec25.014037.18623@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Distribution: alt
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 03:36:45 GMT


From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) [responding to me]
>|> Sorry to burst your bubble, but the reason the University of
>|> California has also been named in the suit is because the issue is
>|> whether or not the original Net2 release distributed by UCB (which
>|> both BSDI and Jolix are derived from) contained code proprietary to
>|> USL.
>
>If this were true, then UCB ould have been the sole defendant named in the
>suit.  UCB was not a defendant in the original suit, only the expanded
>suit;

I'm not sure what conclusion you are trying to draw from this fact
(which is true, UCB was not named in the original suit), but I am
certain the conclusion is wrong.

No one outside of USL is quite sure why UCB was not named in the
original suit, it's easy to speculate of course. But it was clear that
this was an error (based on what USL was trying to claim), and that is
why UCB was named in the second round of claims.

>in addition, since UCB has not been making commercial use of the
>code, the alleged violations of civil law by UCB would be a smaller set
>than the alleged violations by BSDI.

That's probably true, but it's not awfully important vis a vis the
issue of whether or not the Net2 code is proprietary to USL. Yes,
there were some trademark claims etc.

>Their status as codefendant is
>based only on the alegged violations pertaining to distribution/disclosure.

That's a big, big "only".

>These are only a few of the reasons UCB and BSDI are in two very different
>boats in this legal action.

Well, not very different, remove the right to the code and what's left
really?

If USL manages to bankrupt BSDI by removing their only livelihood I
can't see USL expecting (or even pursuing) much in damage claims on
other matters. However, USL could seek damages from the University of
California I suppose, they'd still be solvent.

>|> I do not believe that USL has claimed that BSDI has *added* any
>|> proprietary code to their product, only that the Net2 code it derives
>|> from always contained such code. So the same would be true for Jolix.
>
>Actually, this is precisely what I read into the suit as it was initially
>posted.

I believe you read that into it, but I'm 99% sure you're wrong.

>|> Would you put up your house to start a business entirely dependant on
>|> Linux or Jolix right now? Would you expect to be able to talk someone
>|> else into investing in a company based on this situation?
>
>Certainly not Linux;

Why not Linux (relative to the suit)? That's probably the least in
danger of the variants on the table, tho I think it is in danger
ultimately.

>I believe my views on the viability of enterprises
>based on GPLed software are well known.

Oh, I see, we're off on a tangent. I was referring to the suit and its
potential consequences.

>I doubt that USL will pursue this to the exclusion of all competitiors, if
>only because of the difficulty in getting sole-source justification for
>government contracts, and the SVID compliance ruling against DEC on a
>previous goverment contract (It was either AFCAC 451 or Desktop III) making
>it difficult to avoid being fined otherwise.

This is an interesting aspect I have speculated on before on these
lists, and one which hasn't been raised. I think it remains
problematical for USL, ultimately.

>|> Let's not try to wish away what is going on here.
>
>I agree, but at the same time lets not paint a grimmer picture than
>actually exists in an effort to sway opinions.

People form their own opinions, that's why we're here, right?

I think the potential here is pretty grim in a lot of ways.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
Xref: sparky alt.suit.att-bsdi:675 comp.org.eff.talk:7871 comp.org.sug:523 comp.org.usenix:1098