[Linux-aus] Extent of sco's complaint.

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Thursday,  5 June 2003 at  9:21:25 -0400, Jon Maddog Hall wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Within reason (i.e. two lines of code is too few), the amount of
> code would probably not change the issue of copyright or license
> infringement....but might change the judgment of remedy.  I believe
> this was the case in AT&T vs BSD.  When it was proved that the
> amount of code in question was three files, AT&T withdrew.

Hmm.  My recollection was that that would have been enough (in fact it
was six files).  Copyrighted code is copyrighted code.  AT&T didn't
allow use of those files; they still required them to be fixed.  I go
into one example at http://www.lemis.com/grog/unix-in-BSD.html.

> In a lot of ways it is too bad that the BSD license reads as it
> does.  If SCO had to remove all the BSD licensed code from their
> "AT&T stream", it would probably be a LOT harder.

Heh.  A couple of days ago Warren Toomey discovered that the original
System V sources have more UCB copyright notices than AT&T and Bell
Labs copyright notices :-)

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20030607/30735604/attachment-0001.pgp