[TUHS] UNIX System V Release 2.2 gdts Vax-780

[Clem Cole]

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 5:38 PM KenUnix <ken.unix.guy at gmail.com> wrote:

> So, at this point what is the safest road to take?
>
> Stick with v7?
>
I'm not a lawyer - this is not legal advice. This is how I
personally analyze these Ancient UNIX license wording against the history
of how different UNIX releases we made publically available. *YMMV - get a
legal opinion and form your own opinion and make a personal choice.*

The Ancient UNIX license -- the document Warren has on the site (
https://www.tuhs.org/ancient.html) says [please go read it yourself]:

1.9 SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM means a SCO software offering that is (i)
specifically designed for a 16-Bit computer, or (ii) the 32V version, and
(iii) specifically excludes UNIX System V and successor operating systems.

My take ...

   - Any UNIX package based on the Research Editions 1-7 and 32V is
   allowed. This family includes the16-bit 1BSD, 2BSD, 2.9-11BSD and 32V based
   3BSD, 4BSD, 4.1BSD, 4.2BSD, 4.3BSD and 4.4BSD.
   - PWB1.0 and 2.0 are 16-bit - although PWB 2.0 was not officially
   released outside of the Bell System (except possibly for the note suggested
   about Wollongong advertising they had it).  But under the 16-bit rule - I
   interpret both PWB 1.0 and 2.0 as being covered.
   - PWB 3.0 (*a.k.a.* System III) was released for both PDP-11 and Vaxen
   and was thus generally available to the Unix (source) licensees.   Under
   the 16-bit rule, I would *personally interpret* that PWB 3.0 is covered
   since it is not explicitly called out (as System V is called out).
   - This also puts PWB 4.0 in an interesting place. Like PWB 2.0, it was
   never released outside of the Bell System; although Bell folks had 16-bit
   versions, they were starting to be depreciated in favor of Vaxen and
   WE32000/3B-based ISAs. Given the exclusion starts at System V and *there
   was a 16-bit version* for PWB 4.0 internally, again, I personally *suspect
   it's okay*, but get your own legal opinion, please.
   - Clearly, anything* no matter the *ISA any release is based on System
   V, SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, SVR4, and SVR5 has been excluded in that license,
   which means unless the current IP owners of System V-based UNIX make a
   new license, I personally interpret that as a no-no according to this
   license.


Some other random thoughts..


   - Some of the commercial UNIXs (as described by Charlie WRT to Dell),
   have encumberments beyond AT&Ts - say IP from MIPs whose compiler was often
   used and was not based on the AT&T IP and Transcript or PostScript, which
   came from Adobe.   For instance, besides Dell, DEC, HP, IBM's versions have
   these types of IP issues in Ultrix/HPUX/AIX.  I *suspect *many if not
   most commercial UNIX released would be in the same situation - particularly
   given Charlie example of Dell who was making a 'Wintel' release.
   - IBM, HP, and Sun all bought out their UNIX license from AT&T at some
   point and owned the right to do whatever they wanted with it. And as has
   been discussed here, a version of Solaris which had SVR4 code in it was
   released by Sun and later taken back in by Oracle.   Some questions for
   your lawyers would be:


   1. If Solaris was released, doesn't that make at least the bits from
      that release available forever?      Clearly, some people on
this list have
      made that interpretation - I'm personally not willing to take that risk.
      2. Assume 1 seems to mean that the Solaris IP from that release is
      free to be examined and used since it was partly based on SVR4, does that
      make SVR4 available also? *i.e.* it does not matter what the owners
      of the SVR4 IP think, Sun legally released it with their license?     To
      me, this gets back to the USL vs. BSDi/UCB case ok what was what, and the
      question is how to show some portion of the code base was or want not
      released by Sun and what parts had been.   Again, I personally will not
      take that risk.


ᐧ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20230316/bc012420/attachment.htm>