[TUHS] Re-implementations/Clean-Rooms et al.

[Steve Nickolas]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2022, Warner Losh wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 5:29 PM Steve Nickolas <usotsuki at buric.co> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 8 Sep 2022, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>>> But it likely didn't matter, since 32v likely lost its copyright
>>> protection due to AT&T distributing too many copies without the required
>>> copyright markings. At least that was the preliminary ruling that caused
>>> the suit to be settled... AT&T didn't want it finalized, though the cat
>>> was somewhat out of the bag at this point...
>>
>> It would be nice if that were an absolute rather than a probably, because
>> then the status for 32V wouldn't be clouded.
>>
>
> It would be nice. At this late date, one wonders what would happen if it 
> were litigated again...  I suspect that nobody would bother given the 
> small possible gain and the huge expense... But it would also reduce 
> shareholder values to explicitly say there's no copyright here or to 
> clarify that the ancient licenses are valid. So we're in this state 
> where it's basically free and clear, treated like it's free and clear, 
> but really isn't free and clear.
>
> Warner

I'm probably the only one brazen enough to put it to the test.

For some years, I've wanted to create a free implementation of System V, 
and then move on from there.  (I know there's limited utility for such a 
thing, because of the BSDs.)

A few things actually hinge on this.  If it were considered a fact, and 
not a mere opinion, that 32V was PD, then I could be sure that certain 
things were safe to use, rather than having to rewrite (including some 
particularly tricky stuff the BSDs never fully reimplemented, like 
diff(1)).

I actually did write a replacement for the Caldera header. (I still hold 
that the Caldera license is void because it has a Caldera copyright claim, 
and it has been proven in court that they didn't have the copyright to 
give.)  It just says why I think it *should* be safe to use the code.

-uso.