home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!JUTS!griffin!gab10
- From: gab10@griffincd.amdahl.com (Gary A Browning)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
- Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
- Message-ID: <2cHS02Pi1bvx01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
- Date: 24 Jul 92 07:21:12 GMT
- References: <1992Jul21.104627.3353@mel.dit.csiro.au> <1992Jul21.131433.16450@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
- Sender: netnews@ccc.amdahl.com
- Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
- Lines: 33
-
- In article <1992Jul21.131433.16450@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>,
- eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes:
- > In article <1992Jul21.104627.3353@mel.dit.csiro.au
- smart@wanda.mel.dit.CSIRO.AU (Robert Smart) writes:
- >
- >> This is insanity. Surely this will be thrown out of court.
- > Who is going to defend NET/2?
-
- The person/organization AT&T might sue in the future over NET/2.
-
- BSDI is not responsible for NET/2 so you cannot sue them to have it
- purged. As I see it, the NET/2 distribution is not in question here.
- What can happen is a precedent that goes against using the NET/2
- sources in a working O/S. (or, of course, AT&T could try to sue
- UCB. But I doubt it, since it is going to be hard to explain why
- they waited all these years).
-
- Just my opinion. I am not a lawyer.
-
- Personally, I think AT&T is just trying to put BSDI out of bussiness.
- They must know that BSDI is not capable of funding major legal battles
- at this stage in its development. Makes no difference if their case
- will stand up in court - only that it not be thrown out on an early
- decision.
-
- I like the idea of sending letters of complaint to AT&T explaining
- why you have requested changing your long-distance carrier. Seems like
- fair play in light of AT&T's tactics.
-
- --
- Gary Browning | Exhilaration is that feeling you get just after a
- | great idea hits you, and just before you realize
- | what is wrong with it.
-