Posted Aug 19, 2003 17:33 UTC (Tue) by rfunk
In reply to: out there
Parent article: Heise reports from SCO Forum
That doesn't work: copyright isn't the same as
Good point, though actually I was thinking trade secret, not trademark.
And SCO has been including trade secret misappropriation as part of their
accusations, though it's not clear to me which one they're thinking of
with this code.
Rather, we (IBM, really) will need to rely on the Regents of U.C vs. USL
agreement granting U.C. full rights to that code as it appears in 2.11 BSD
Except as Bruce has pointed out, we don't know the full terms of the
agreement. Are you saying that UC won full rights to everything in
2.11BSD? That's the first I've heard of that.
UCB dropped the advertising clause requirement sometime after that. SCO
has no proprietary rights to anything that appears in the last BSD
Yes, but this code doesn't appear in the last BSD release. (2.11 is
quite a bit older than 4.4.)
to post comments)