home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!ames!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ddsw1.mcs.COM!karl
- From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.COM (Karl Denninger)
- Subject: Re: AT&T USL vs. BSDI/UCB, Mach3, OSF/1, GNU HURD, Linux
- Message-ID: <BuG1v1.E5o@ddsw1.mcs.com>
- Summary: This could get AT&T in trouble
- Sender: daemon@cis.ohio-state.edu
- Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Chicago, IL
- References: <PCG.92Sep5151041@aberdb.aber.ac.uk>
- Distribution: gnu
- Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 02:35:24 GMT
- Lines: 68
-
-
- In article <PCG.92Sep9230720@aberdb.aber.ac.uk> pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
- >On 5 Sep 92 20:24:56 GMT, jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) said:
- >NNTP-Posting-Host: ohm.berkeley.edu
- >
- >jbuck> (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
- >
- >I doubt this strategy is tenable. Part of the educational UNIX source
- >license are clauses that state:
- >
- > 1) all work done by the licensee with UNIX must be supplied free
- > of charge to any other UNIX source licensee.
- >
- > 2) all work done by the licensee *on* UNIX (the kernel) becomes
- > the intellectual property of the licensor, AT&T/USL.
-
- Whoh! Just a minute here!
-
- Just because a student does work on a program does NOT make the code he or
- she writes the property of anyone else! I know that I never signed
- anything like that in college, and wouldn't have at any cost.
-
- That software that I wrote in college is MY property. No one else's. I
- would have refused to sign away those rights and sued the school if
- necessary to retain them. The college would be on damn thin ice requiring
- me to give up my code in order to consider it as "counting" in coursework
- I do believe. They are >certainly< not my employer; in fact, the exact
- opposite I belive (I pay tuition, in effect employing >them< to teach me
- something).
-
- Absent an assignment of those rights, or a PD notice, that software is
- copyrighted by ME. I suspect that this holds true for those students who
- worked on the BSD sources as well.
-
- My suspicion is that any attempt by AT&T to "claim" that work could easily
- be ruled invalid and unenforceable -- returning full copyright control to
- the authors.
-
- Failing to protect your copyright once doesn't invalidate it, unlike trade
- secret or trademark protections.....
-
- Therefore, perhaps there is a third strategy which UCB could persue against
- AT&T/USL -- through their graduates. The incorporated pieces of those
- student's work which were not derivitives of AT&T code (like the VFS stuff,
- most of the networking code, etc) could easily be ruled >the student's<
- property. The only "defense" here would be possibly the release to the
- world via the NET/1 and NET/2 releases -- but even that is resolvable --
- get the ex-students involved to sign over the copyrights, if any, to the
- Regents and then have the Regents go after AT&T with a vengence. I dare
- say that most of the people who worked on this would probably not mind this
- at all (since their already is publically available, and this could be quite
- a weapon).
-
- Now, how much of that work is in the SVR4 release? Hmmm.....
-
- This could get >quite< interesting.
-
- Anyone on the net know if this is something that might work? I think it
- would be most interesting to do this to USL, considering that their
- "offsping" (Southwestern Bell, etc) likes to bring >criminal< charges
- against people for unsubstantiated copyright infringement (Operation Sun
- Devil comes to mind).
-
- --
- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
- Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
- Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions
-
-