<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>I think the real risk is not measured in dollars, but potential
damage to reputations, ill will, the perception that it's not
legal or kosher, etc.<br>
</p>
So I completely understand this well-founded caution.<br>
<br>
However if anyone was interested in approaching the license holders
and seeing if licenses could be obtained or purchased, I'm
interested in that.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/15/2023 04:30 PM, Warner Losh
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANCZdfqwfsbDBPR5r8Lo7yv69he-btyRpy1i8mfVgU74J2Y_Dg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at
3:56 PM steve jenkin <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:sjenkin@canb.auug.org.au">sjenkin@canb.auug.org.au</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">"What “uses” would SysV
codebase have now?" may be a better Q.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A System V release 2 might have very limited use (old
VAXen are all it ran on from</div>
<div>AT&T though there were at least a few ports: 68k for
sure).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The successor code base of OpenIndiana which forked from
OpenSolaris which was System Vr4 plus a bunch... And that's
open... illumos is still using that for its distribution...
They'd have been totally dead, imho, were it not for OpenZFS
using illumos for so long as the reference platform (that's
changed, so now Linux and FreeBSD are the reference
platforms, though one of those two is more equal than the
other).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But the successor code base being open isn't quite the
same as System V being open. There's no 'orphan exception'
or 'abandonware rider' that would allow us to distribute
this without any legal risk.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But there's the rub: what's the legal risk. The legal
risk here is that somebody could show up and assert they
have rights to the software, and that we're distributing it
illegally. Actual damages likely are near $0 these days, but
statutory damages could become quite excessive. But to get
damages, one would likely need a lot of money to fight it,
and there's not any kind of real revenue stream from System
V today (let alone from System V r2). Plus, were this
successfully prosecuted, it's not like that would increase
that revenue stream: TUHS has no assets, so the current IP
owner would have to somehow assess there was blood to be had
from this stone, which is unlikely... So, how do you rate
the risk of a low-probability, high damage outcome vs the
near certainty of a no-damage outcome. Since it's none of
our butt's but Warren's, he gets to decide his comfort zone
here. :)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So the risk of adverse consequences is likely low, but
not zero were we to distribute this without a license to do
so. There's plenty of others that are doing so today, but
that's between the others and whatever IP owners </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't legal
advice...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Warner</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>