Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.announce
From: wdevine@diralect.me.pvamu.edu (William Devine)
Subject: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big PROFIT.$$$
Message-ID: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu>
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Keywords: Novell, Expose, selling Linux
Sender: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Reply-To: wdevine@diralect.me.pvamu.edu (William Devine)
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 05:36:18 GMT
Approved: linux-announce@tc.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Lines: 159
Xref: doc.ic.ac.uk comp.os.linux.help:32907 comp.os.linux.admin:7208
comp.os.linux.announce:2149
Here is an announcement from novell. Followed by A rebuke letter for
anyone interested in emailing novell to gripe about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Novell Brewing a New 32-Bit GUI Environment (PC Week)
>From PC Week for April 25, 1994 by PC Week Staff
Novell Inc. is developing a low-cost, 32-bit multitasking operating
environment based on a "freeware" version of Unix that sources said will
run Windows, DOS, NetWare, and Unix applications.
Novell is expected to demonstrate the software -- which it is developing
under tight security at an off-site warehouse -- to a few select users
at next week's NetWorld+Interop trade show, said sources close to the
Provo, Utah, company.
The new system, code-named Expose, is not a derivative of Novell's own
UnixWare; it is based on Linux, a full-featured Unix clone for PCs that
is distributed under a free GNU Public License, sources said. Linux 1.0,
which shipped in March, runs on 386- and 486-based ISA and EISA
computers.
Expose will be based on a graphical X Window System environment called
Looking Glass, which Novell licensed from Visix Software Inc., of
Reston, Va. It is expected to use an advanced 3-D desktop metaphor to
allow users to easily navigate through it, sources said.
Expose "is not as much an applications environment as it is a front end
to many environments, [including] NetWare, Unix, and Windows
applications," said a source who has been briefed on the project. Users
also will be able to run Expose as a front end to the Internet, possibly
through the Mosaic GUI, sources said.
However, one source said development is in the early stages, and given
Novell's track record, the project could be abandoned if it does not
show strong promise.
Another source said Novell has already demonstrated Microsoft Corp.'s
Office suite of Windows applications running on Expose. The source
claimed the applications were running without a Windows emulator, even
though Linux does not fully support Windows applications.
Novell's goal, sources said, is to quickly bring to market a graphical
operating environment that would give PC users a lower-cost alternative
to Windows. The environment would likely be priced below UnixWare's $249
price and possibly even lower than the $149.95 retail price asked for
Windows.
"Ray [Noorda] would give it away if he could," said a source
knowledgeable about the project.
The GNU license allows developers to use and modify the Linux code and
sell it for any price the market will bear -- with the caveat that they
must also distribute the Linux source code with their derivative
products.
Some corporate NetWare users questioned the sagacity of Novell
developing yet another graphical 32-bit operating system. "I'd hate to
see them spend a whole lot of research resources on one more operating
system," said Jim Queen, director of enterprise networking for Enron
Corp., a Houston-based energy company with a large NetWare network. "If
they have a vision for this thing, they'd better share it."
Another IS manager said he is still trying to get his company's current
set of desktop operating systems to work together on a LAN. But although
he doesn't want to deal with yet another contender, "I'll keep an open
mind," said Lee Roth, LAN manager for Dallas-based Southwest Airlines
Co. "If [Expose] gives me some new functionality, I'll consider it."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To whom it may concern,
I read an article sent to me by a friend who saw the add posted
in either usenet of some local newsgroup. It mentions a project of yours
called 'Expose'. The article is included after this for you to ensure it
is the correct one i am mentioning.
The article says that Novell is developing a derivative of the
Linux operating system that will run Windows, DOS, Netware, and other Unix
applications. It also states explicity that:
"The new system, code-named Expose, is not a derivative of Novell's
own UnixWare; it is based on Linux, a full-featured Unix clone for
PCs that is distributed under a free GNU Public License, sources
said. Linux 1.0, which shipped in March, runs on 386- and 486-based
ISA and EISA computers."
It goes on to extoll the virtues of project Expose and then it
mentions the most disturbing part of the article: Namely, that Novell is
planning on SELLING this software package for a 'good sum of money' to the
general public. 'Good sum of money' being in reference to the cost of other
software covered under the GNU General Public License of which any and ALL
derivatives of ANY GPL covered software is part of.
I urge you to fully understand what this means. The GPL EXPLICITLY
states, and i quote:
"2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License."
[prep.ai.mit.edu:/pub/gnu/COPYING]
"The GPL also allows people to take and modify free software, and
distribute their own versions of the software. however, any derived
works from GPL software MUST also be covered by the GPL. In other
words, a company COULD NOT take Linux, modify it, and SELL it under
a restrictive license. If any software is derived from Linux, that
software MUST be covered by the GPL as well."
[Page 16, tsx-11.mit.edu:/pub/Linux/docs/LDP/install-guide-2.0.ps.gz]
As you see, this states that no entity, be it personal or a business,
may modify ANY software released and covered under the GPL and resale it
for a profit ON the software. Profit on the DISTRIBUTION of said software
is not illegal, but if you sell one copy of the software to anyone and you
MUST make ALL source code available that is derived from the GPL covered
software (of which Linux IS GPL covered software), that person is within
their legal right to FREELY distribute said software to anyone and everyone
he desires.
The idea of the GPL was to make software copyrightable and freely
distributable at the same time to ensure that a large amount of excellent and
useful software was available to the world. There are software packages
covered by the GPL for unix, dos, windows and other operating systems.
Gnuplot has been ported to Windows and is an excellent graphics program.
Gzip and Gunzip have been ported to Dos along with GnuTar and they are
excellent software programs. Expose sounds to be a VERY promising software
package, BUT according to the announcement, it will be sold for a profit ON
the software, not on the DISTRIBUTION of the software.
I just want to go on the record to say that if you are going to
be selling this Expose software package for a profit and you have derived
a very large portion of it from the publicly available GPL covered
Linux operating system developed in large by Linus Torvalds, that you will
be doing so against the Legal license it was released under. Especially
since the Linux OS has been developed and refined and fine tuned by a large
amount of Programmers and especially Linus who has spent ungodly amounts of
time improving this os and not making a profit off of it, not even making
practically ANYTHING from it. It would be a sin for anyone to make any
money from others efforts in my eyes and the eyes of everyone else who
knows about Linus and his efforts.
Sincerely,
William C Devine, II
The Electrical Diralect, PAX
--
Mail submissions for comp.os.linux.announce to: linux-announce@tc.cornell.edu
Be sure to include Keywords: and a short description of your software.
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!sunic!trane.uninett.no!uninett.no!hta
From: h...@uninett.no (Harald T. Alvestrand)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big PROFIT.$$$
Date: 25 Apr 1994 07:56:56 GMT
Organization: Uninett
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <2pft49$7iq@trane.uninett.no>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <Cot0Lz.DF6@eecs.nwu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: domen.uninett.no
If someone with a real distribution network in Norway is willing to sell
me a CD-ROM with Linux, Linux source, MOTIF libraries and a GUI, with at
least some support services, for less than USD 150, I am interested.
I don't care whether they are called Novell or Morse.
The guy didn't mention what address he was E-mailing; if we get any
rumours that the rumour is true, and Novell is considering cancelling
the project because of adverse community reactions, perhaps we shoud
do some mass mailings from the other side?
(BTW, I don't see how Novell can sell this product without Netware
filesystem interworking, and I don't see how this can be done without
GPLed code for the Netware drivers; interesting, considering the
stonewalling that the guy with the IPX drivers has gotten from them....)
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Harald.T.Alvestr...@uninett.no
G=Harald;I=T;S=Alvestrand;O=uninett;P=uninett;C=no
+47 73 59 70 94
My son's name is Torbjørn. The letter between "j" and "r" is o with a slash.
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!
jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!ghost.dsi.unimi.it!batcomputer!cornell!mdw
From: m...@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big PROFIT.$$$
Message-ID: <1994Apr25.171945.21812@cs.cornell.edu>
Organization: Cornell CS Robotics and Vision Laboratory, Ithaca, NY 14850
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <Cot0Lz.DF6@eecs.nwu.edu>
<2pft49$7iq@trane.uninett.no>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 17:19:45 GMT
Lines: 21
In article <2pft49$...@trane.uninett.no> h...@uninett.no (Harald T. Alvestrand) writes:
>If someone with a real distribution network in Norway is willing to sell
>me a CD-ROM with Linux, Linux source, MOTIF libraries and a GUI, with at
>least some support services, for less than USD 150, I am interested.
The point is not that people can sell Linux for money. They can. The
point is that Novell can't take Linux, modify it, and redistribute it
under a licence other than the GPL. Therefore, "Expose" would have to be
freely distributable, and the original poster's intent was to bring
this to our (and Novell's) attention.
Yes, I approved the article; it was subsequently cancelled by the original
poster. The original poster said that the account of Expose was documented,
therefore I posted it. The opinions expressed by postings in c.o.l.announce
are not my responsibility, and it's not my job to block postings that I
might disagree with. Believe it or not, I'm not into censorship.
Hey, I even approved Jesus Monroy Jr.'s postings, until I discovered that
he was really an AI.
mdw
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!dearn!esoc!btitmars
Organization: ESOC European Space Operations Centre
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 07:42:15 EST
From: BARRY TITMARSH <BTITM...@ESOC.BITNET>
Message-ID: <94117.074215BTITMARS@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu>
<2pgkci$91d@nz12.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
Lines: 6
This may be the ideal time to get hands on Novells software Like the IPX
bits that would them become GPL if developed for linux.
I remember Alan Cox saying that getting Info from Novell on IPX to help
the IPX project was almost impossible.
If its produced, Ill get one copy and give away 1000's hi hi.
Bt.
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!
news.intercon.com!udel!news2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!wyvern!
taylor.wyvern.com!mark
From: m...@taylor.wyvern.com (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Organization: Lake Taylor Hospital Computer Services
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 02:47:51 GMT
Message-ID: <1994Apr26.024751.22997@taylor.wyvern.com>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu>
<2pgkci$91d@nz12.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
<1994Apr25.215313.11522@kf8nh.wariat.org>
Lines: 17
b...@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
>I'm going to sit back and watch developments, I think, rather than
>overreacting at this point; the article seemed to be saying between the lines
>that "Expose" was still rather fragile in terms of whether it would be a
>product or not, or even be finished.
None of this makes any sense at all anyway. Novell makes Unixware, which I
can purchase for well under $150. If they wanted to flood the world with
an ultra low-cost Unix (they already have, really), they could just do
it with Unixware.
--
/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Mark A. Davis | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
| Sys.Administrator| Computer Services | m...@taylor.wyvern.com .uucp |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------------/
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!udel!
news2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!redstone.interpath.net!
mercury.interpath.net!not-for-mail
From: ctwil...@mercury.interpath.net (Personal Account)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: 27 Apr 1994 21:43:45 -0400
Organization: Interpath -- Public Access UNIX for North Carolina
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <2pn4ch$7p@mercury.interpath.net>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
<1994Apr25.215313.11522@kf8nh.wariat.org> <1994Apr26.024751.22997@taylor.wyvern.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mercury.interpath.net
In article <1994Apr26.024751.22...@taylor.wyvern.com>,
Mark A. Davis <m...@taylor.wyvern.com> wrote:
>b...@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
>
>>I'm going to sit back and watch developments, I think, rather than
>>overreacting at this point; the article seemed to be saying between the lines
>>that "Expose" was still rather fragile in terms of whether it would be a
>>product or not, or even be finished.
>
>None of this makes any sense at all anyway. Novell makes Unixware, which I
>can purchase for well under $150. If they wanted to flood the world with
>an ultra low-cost Unix (they already have, really), they could just do
>it with Unixware.
About the only thing that could make sense if it weren't so ridiculous
would be some kind of attempt by Novell to somehow steal linux code by
making mods to the kernel and trying to claim it as all their own. If
this ludicrous scenario were actually true, it would be a pretty good
way to axe a serious competitor to Unixware. On the other hand, it
would be a possible test for the GPL (has it *ever* been tested in a
court of law?)...but, like I said, pretty ridiculous.
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Tom Wilson | "I can't complain, but sometimes |
| ctwil...@rock.concert.net | I still do." |
| | -Joe Walsh |
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de!
newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de!ina.zfn.uni-bremen.de!
marvin.pc-labor.uni-bremen.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!
xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!udel!news2.sprintlink.net!
news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!kbass
From: kb...@clark.net (Ken Bass)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Date: 29 Apr 1994 21:02:46 GMT
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc., Ellicott City, MD USA
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <2prslm$6he@clarknet.clark.net>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
<1994Apr25.215313.11522@kf8nh.wariat.org> <1994Apr26.024751.22997@taylor.wyvern.com>
<2pn4ch$7p@mercury.interpath.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: clark.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Personal Account (ctwil...@mercury.interpath.net) wrote:
: About the only thing that could make sense if it weren't so ridiculous
: would be some kind of attempt by Novell to somehow steal linux code by
: making mods to the kernel and trying to claim it as all their own. If
: this ludicrous scenario were actually true, it would be a pretty good
: way to axe a serious competitor to Unixware. On the other hand, it
: would be a possible test for the GPL (has it *ever* been tested in a
: court of law?)...but, like I said, pretty ridiculous.
Why is this so hard to imagine. Large corporations rip of inventors,
small business, etc all the time. This would be no different, except for
the large number of victims.
---Ken
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.kei.com!MathWorks.Com!
news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!honeydew.srv.cs.cmu.edu!
das-news.harvard.edu!spdcc!merk!rmkhome!rmk
From: r...@rmkhome.com (Rick Kelly)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <94117.074215BTITMARS@ESOC.BITNET>
Message-ID: <9405031840.14@rmkhome.com>
Reply-To: r...@rmkhome.com (Rick Kelly)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 23:40:16 GMT
Lines: 14
BARRY TITMARSH (BTITM...@ESOC.BITNET) wrote:
: This may be the ideal time to get hands on Novells software Like the IPX
: bits that would them become GPL if developed for linux.
: I remember Alan Cox saying that getting Info from Novell on IPX to help
: the IPX project was almost impossible.
: If its produced, Ill get one copy and give away 1000's hi hi.
: Bt.
Or Novell may be the first company to challenge the GPL in court.
--
Rick Kelly r...@rmkhome.com r...@bedford.progress.com
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!rtp.vnet.net!news1.digex.net!lynx.unm.edu!
jobone!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!yale!yale.edu!nigel.msen.com!zib-berlin.de!
news.th-darmstadt.de!news.uni-mainz.de!kubla
From: ku...@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (Dominik Kubla)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: 06 May 1994 18:26:34 GMT
Organization: Johannes Gutenberg-Universitaet Mainz
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <KUBLA.94May6202635@mogli.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph1va$qce@nkosi.well.com>
<2pmuko$1dsq@nic.smsu.edu>,<newcombe.109.000991A9@aa.csc.peachnet.edu>
<1994May5.133549.29598@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
<newcombe.140.010EE388@aa.csc.peachnet.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mogli.zdv.uni-mainz.de
Keywords: Novell Expose
In-reply-to: newcombe@aa.csc.peachnet.edu's message of Thu, 5 May 1994 15:43:47
UNDEFINED
There is something else to the idea of Novell distributing a product based upon
the Linux kernel: Remember the complaints of Alex Cox while he was porting the
IPX protocol to Linux? He said there was little help from Novell ...
Now imagine Novell selling an OS with just rudimentary IPX support and none of
the upper protocols (SPX, ...)! Are you getting the point?
It is most likely that they will improve the IPX part of the kernel and when
they do this, the GPL requires that they make their changes available in source
code!
Wow! What a perspective for Linux ...
Dominik
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| eMail: ku...@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE |
| sMail: Dominik Kubla, Lannerstra"se 53, 55270 Ober-Olm, F.R. of Germany |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uknet!cf-cm!
cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <1994May5.204802.15029@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <94117.074215BTITMARS@ESOC.BITNET>
<9405031840.14@rmkhome.com>
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 20:48:02 GMT
Lines: 22
In article <9405031840...@rmkhome.com> r...@rmkhome.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>BARRY TITMARSH (BTITM...@ESOC.BITNET) wrote:
>: This may be the ideal time to get hands on Novells software Like the IPX
>: bits that would them become GPL if developed for linux.
>: I remember Alan Cox sif I, 4 Mat getting Info from Novell on IPX to help
>: the IPX project was almost impossible.
I had no trouble with IPX information. It was when I started writing a clone
Novell server they got a bit touchy. Everything you need to implement IPX
itself is available on the ftp.novell.com server. I've also had help from
several Novell people in their capacity as human beings.
I still recommend people stick to SAMBA and the W4Wg or the free lan
manager client or run NFS, simply because I don't believe in closed
standards.
>Or Novell may be the first company to challenge the GPL in court.
Maybe, but nothing stops someone bundling Linux with commercial software
Alan
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!
howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!waikato!canterbury.ac.nz!equinox.gen.nz!
equinox!Matthew_Grant
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
<1994Apr25.215313.11522@kf8nh.wariat.org>
<1994Apr26.024751.22997@taylor.wyvern.com> <2pn4ch$7p@mercury.interpath.net>
<2prslm$6he@clarknet.clark.net>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 021193BETA PL3]
From: Matthew_Gr...@equinox.gen.nz (Grantma)
Message-ID: <Matthew_Grant.c662@equinox.gen.nz>
Date: Thu, 5 May 94 01:03:43 +1200
Organization: Equinox Networks
Lines: 31
Ken Bass (kb...@clark.net) wrote:
: Personal Account (ctwil...@mercury.interpath.net) wrote:
: : About the only thing that could make sense if it weren't so ridiculous
: : would be some kind of attempt by Novell to somehow steal linux code by
: : making mods to the kernel and trying to claim it as all their own. If
: : this ludicrous scenario were actually true, it would be a pretty good
: : way to axe a serious competitor to Unixware. On the other hand, it
: : would be a possible test for the GPL (has it *ever* been tested in a
: : court of law?)...but, like I said, pretty ridiculous.
: Why is this so hard to imagine. Large corporations rip of inventors,
: small business, etc all the time. This would be no different, except for
: the large number of victims.
I do not want flame Novell if they want to be friendly and not detriment the
Linux community any time now or in the future. If they have good
intentions, I welcome their contributions.
Have some people who work for Novell or USL written ANY of the kernel code
for Linux in their spare time? Is any of this a major part of the kernel?
If so how much? If this has happened Novell could claim that the work of
their employees in their spare time has used information/ideas from work or
that it owns the copyright on any of their employee's work if it related to
their business. If this legally holds water where ever this is the case, as
I think it does in New Zealand, we could be in for serious trouble.
Linus, if you hear this, do you have any comment.
Cheers,
Matthew Grant
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!swrinde!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!
pipex!uknet!EU.net!uunet!mtnmath.mtnmath.com!not-for-mail
From: p...@mtnmath.mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Date: 7 May 1994 09:01:02 -0700
Organization: Mountain Math Software, P. O. Box 2124, Saratoga. CA 95070
Lines: 29
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <2qgdvu$12t@mtnmath.mtnmath.com>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
<1994Apr25.215313.11522@kf8nh.wariat.org>
<1994Apr26.024751.22997@taylor.wyvern.com> <2pn4ch$7p@mercury.interpath.net>
<2prslm$6he@clarknet.clark.net> <Matthew_Grant.c662@equinox.gen.nz>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.mtnmath.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Grantma (Matthew_Gr...@equinox.gen.nz) wrote:
: Have some people who work for Novell or USL written ANY of the kernel code
: for Linux in their spare time? Is any of this a major part of the kernel?
: If so how much? If this has happened Novell could claim that the work of
: their employees in their spare time has used information/ideas from work or
: that it owns the copyright on any of their employee's work if it related to
: their business. [...]
This is nonsense. Suppose you did some programming in your spare time
for another company. Would this mean your full time employer owned the
copyright to this code? There are terms in most employee contracts that
make the employer the owner of any patentable ideas related to ones work.
There is a big difference however between patent and copyright protection.
You are perfectly free to use the skills and ideas you acquire at work for
any other employer. It is only propietarty information that you cannot use
elsewhere. If you publicly release proprietary information you can be sued by
your employer but once the cat is out of the bag the information is no longer
proprietary. Those that obtained the information in a legal way cannot be
sued or legally prevented from using it.
It is certainly possible that someone might obtain a patent on some
techniques used in the Linux kernel and force the code to be removed or
royalties to be paid. That is one of the reasons it is so important to fight
against software patents. However this danger applys equally to any patent
anyone might obtain regardless of who put the offending code in the kernel.
Even Linus can be prevented from using his own code! :-(
Paul Budnik
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!
spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!igor.rutgers.edu!
geneva.rutgers.edu!hedrick
From: hedr...@geneva.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <May.8.15.45.06.1994.15010@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Date: 8 May 94 19:45:07 GMT
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph3dn$qvd@nkosi.well.com>
<1994Apr25.215313.11522@kf8nh.wariat.org>
<1994Apr26.024751.22997@taylor.wyvern.com> <2pn4ch$7p@mercury.interpath.net>
<2prslm$6he@clarknet.clark.net> <Matthew_Grant.c662@equinox.gen.nz> <2qgd
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.admin
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 7
p...@mtnmath.mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik) writes:
>Even Linus can be prevented from using his own code! :-(
I understand the point you're trying to make, but this statement isn't
quite true. As far as I know, only the U.S. has these absurd ideas
about patents. Linus isn't a resident of the U.S.
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uknet!cf-cm!cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <1994May11.120948.11225@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <Matthew_Grant.c662@equinox.gen.nz> <2qgd
<May.8.15.45.06.1994.15010@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 12:09:48 GMT
Lines: 17
In article <May.8.15.45.06.1994.15...@geneva.rutgers.edu>
hedr...@geneva.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:
>p...@mtnmath.mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik) writes:
>>Even Linus can be prevented from using his own code! :-(
>I understand the point you're trying to make, but this statement isn't
>quite true. As far as I know, only the U.S. has these absurd ideas
>about patents. Linus isn't a resident of the U.S.
The U.S. patent law could be used to attack Linux distribution within the US
if it violated any patent, and the software patents arguments stood up in US
law. Given the fact PGP 2.3 just got more popular from the PKP fiasco...
I believe Switzerland also has software patents, although in their case
only sensible jusfiably mega-clever ones.
Alan
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!get.hooked.net!decwrl!pa.dec.com!
decuac.dec.com!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sunic!trane.uninett.no!astfgl.edb.tih.no!
humpty.edb.tih.no!colargol.edb.tih.no!jornj
From: jo...@colargol.edb.tih.no (Joern Jensen)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <CppAz0.652@edb.tih.no>
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Sender: news...@edb.tih.no (News Adm humpty)
Nntp-Posting-Host: colargol.edb.tih.no
Organization: Trondheim College of Engineering, Norway
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2ph1va$qce@nkosi.well.com>
<KUBLA.94May6202635@mogli.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE>
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:52:11 GMT
Lines: 18
I removed the other newsgroups from this thread, it's a waste of
bandwidth.
Dominik Kubla (ku...@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE) wrote:
[..]
: It is most likely that they will improve the IPX part of the kernel and when
: they do this, the GPL requires that they make their changes available in source
: code!
Now this would be very nice. But do anyone know if this implies also if
Linux gets 'modular' drivers? That would mean that Novell didn't have to
change any source in the kernel to add IPX. Will a driver written as a
module be regarded as 'based on' the kernel-source? If there is such a
thing as a standard api for modules, can programming an application that
uses this api be said to be 'based on' the GPL-licensed code?
//jornj
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!cf-cm!cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <1994May13.120327.11608@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <2ph1va$qce@nkosi.well.com> <KUBLA.94May6202635@mogli.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE>
<CppAz0.652@edb.tih.no>
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 12:03:27 GMT
Lines: 34
In article <CppAz0....@edb.tih.no> jo...@colargol.edb.tih.no (Joern Jensen) writes:
>: It is most likely that they will improve the IPX part of the kernel and when
>: they do this, the GPL requires that they make their changes available in source
>: code!
>
>Now this would be very nice. But do anyone know if this implies also if
>Linux gets 'modular' drivers? That would mean that Novell didn't have to
>change any source in the kernel to add IPX. Will a driver written as a
Modules are dynamically linked code (like shared libraries), not seperate
applications. Its a little fuzzier than that too a lawyer I suspect. As it
happens several Novell people have been contributing code in their role
as individuals to Linux including help with the DOS emulation and IPX
fixes.
What it basically seems to come down to with Novell in my experience is
o IPX info is pretty much free
o SPX info is very hard to get but can be deduced from the Xerox XNS
that it closely follows and from ethernet dumps
o NCP is a tightly guarded secret and licensable only under strict
rules and at high cost. Since thats the key to a lot of their
sales I understand why even if I dislike it.
In fact with NCP bits are documented in free Novell documents as overviews
and concepts, a load more is documented in Dr.Dobbs journal Nov 1993 and the
rest can be found out by analysing ethernet or the output off NETX.
Someone (including Novell) could easily write a NETX client for Linux using
UserFS and the kernel IPX code. Given a lot of time you could also clone the
Novell server too 8)
Alan
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!agate!agate!talvola
From: talv...@fennel.berkeley.edu (Erik Talvola)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: 13 May 94 16:08:58
Organization: /home/users/talvola/.organization
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <TALVOLA.94May13160858@fennel.berkeley.edu>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu> <2qsudm$brd@harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fennel.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: acbul1@penfold.cc.monash.edu.au's message of 12 May 1994 09:55:02 GMT
I'm not sure what people think the problem is here. "Linux" is a collection
of programs. The kernel is GPL, and Novell would have to provide source code
for it. However, if they take the Linux kernel, and add some of their own
applications to it (from the original article, it sounds like this is their
plan), and sell it for whatever (the article mentioned about $100 I think),
there is no problem at all. Many major pieces of Linux are not GPL programs,
like X11 for example.
I hope Novell continues with the project. Getting commercial support of
Linux from a large company like Novell would likely stabilize the kernel
quickly.
--
+-----------------------------+
! Erik Talvola | "It's just what we need... a colossal negative
! er...@psi.prc.com | space wedgie of great power coming right at us
! talv...@gnu.ai.mit.edu | at warp speed." -- Star Drek
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!
newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!not-for-mail
From: andyd...@MCS.COM (Andrew Deckowitz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: 14 May 1994 00:04:58 -0500
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <2r1m5q$qum@Venus.mcs.com>
References: <ann-405.767252167@cs.cornell.edu>
<2qsudm$brd@harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au> <TALVOLA.94May13160858@fennel.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: venus.mcs.com
talv...@fennel.berkeley.edu (Erik Talvola) writes:
>I'm not sure what people think the problem is here. "Linux" is a collection
>of programs. The kernel is GPL, and Novell would have to provide source code
>for it. However, if they take the Linux kernel, and add some of their own
>applications to it (from the original article, it sounds like this is their
>plan), and sell it for whatever (the article mentioned about $100 I think),
>there is no problem at all. Many major pieces of Linux are not GPL programs,
>like X11 for example.
>I hope Novell continues with the project. Getting commercial support of
>Linux from a large company like Novell would likely stabilize the kernel
>quickly.
>--
>+-----------------------------+
>! Erik Talvola | "It's just what we need... a colossal negative
>! er...@psi.prc.com | space wedgie of great power coming right at us
>! talv...@gnu.ai.mit.edu | at warp speed." -- Star Drek
I too do not see a problem with Novell creating a GUI for Linux. But I
do have to add a guffaw at the thought of Novell's support actually
adding value to Linux development. At this time, Novell developer
support is somewhat of a standing joke. Being an optimist, I do have
high hopes for Novell's new Enterprise Support Division. Unfortunately
I am also a cynical realist, and expect to be disappointed.
And as if this thread is not already twisted enough...
What do you all think of Novell's plans to port ALL of Netware to *nix
platforms, as announced recently? InfoWorld, May 9, page 1:
(quoted w/o permission)
Novell Inc. intends to port NetWare's Key services - including file
print, imaging, and directory - to Unix, by late next year and
eventually to all platforms, according to company officials.
Summary: first they will port to UnixWare, then they will produce
operating-system independent services to allow NetWare features on
non-NetWare operating systems.
Of course these ports will not be free, but I am not adverse to paying
for quality. And on a related note, any word on a commercial x-server
for Matrox video cards using the MGA chipset?
--
Andy Deckowitz | Network Administrator |The Crystal Wind is the
andyd...@mcs.com |Direct Marketing Technology|Storm, and the Storm is
andyd...@aol.com | andyd%...@mcimail.com |Data, and the Data is Life
GCS -d+ -p+ c++++(++) l u e*(-) m+@ s/+ n- h*(+) f?/- g+ w+ t+ r++ y+(*)
These are MY opinions, who else would want them?
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uunet!news.nevada.edu!jimi!ftlofaro
From: ftlof...@unlv.edu (Frank Lofaro)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <1994May15.085357.2299@unlv.edu>
Sender: n...@unlv.edu (News User)
Organization: University of Nevada, Las Vegas
References: <2qgd <May.8.15.45.06.1994.15010@geneva.rutgers.edu>
<1994May11.120948.11225@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Date: Sun, 15 May 94 08:53:57 GMT
Lines: 23
In article <1994May11.120948.11...@uk.ac.swan.pyr> iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
writes:
>In article <May.8.15.45.06.1994.15...@geneva.rutgers.edu> hedr...@geneva.rutgers.edu
>(Charles Hedrick) writes:
>>p...@mtnmath.mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik) writes:
>>>Even Linus can be prevented from using his own code! :-(
>>I understand the point you're trying to make, but this statement isn't
>>quite true. As far as I know, only the U.S. has these absurd ideas
>>about patents. Linus isn't a resident of the U.S.
>The U.S. patent law could be used to attack Linux distribution within the US
>if it violated any patent, and the software patents arguments stood up in US
>law. Given the fact PGP 2.3 just got more popular from the PKP fiasco...
>
>I believe Switzerland also has software patents, although in their case
>only sensible jusfiably mega-clever ones.
>
>Alan
>
Can stuff currently in the Linux kernel be outlawed due to a new patent?
Even though the Linux kernel is pre-existing and thus (?) constitutes
"prior art". Or does prior art only apply to prior _patented_ work, and one
can patent anything under the sun, unless that stuff is already patented?
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!
utnut!torn!uunet.ca!uunet.ca!ionews.io.org!nobody
From: shm...@io.org (Shmuel Weidberg)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: 15 May 1994 16:37:12 -0400
Organization: Internex Online, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (416 363 3783)
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <-DZrjyI-Od27064yn@io.org>
References: <2qgd <May.8.15.45.06.1994.15010@geneva.rutgers.edu>
<1994May11.120948.11225@uk.ac.swan.pyr> <1994May15.085357.2299@unlv.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: io.org
In article <1994May15.085357.2...@unlv.edu>, Frank Lofaro wrote:
>
> Can stuff currently in the Linux kernel be outlawed due to a new patent?
> Even though the Linux kernel is pre-existing and thus (?) constitutes
> "prior art". Or does prior art only apply to prior _patented_ work, and one
> can patent anything under the sun, unless that stuff is already patented?
Anything you write is patented.
--
--Shmuel-Weidberg-Toronto-shm...@io.org--
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de!messua!dak
From: d...@messua.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (David Kastrup)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: 16 May 1994 09:04:33 GMT
Organization: Rechnerbetrieb Informatik - RWTH Aachen
Lines: 36
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <2r7cv1$gac@urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>
References: <2qgd <May.8.15.45.06.1994.15010@geneva.rutgers.edu>
<1994May11.120948.11225@uk.ac.swan.pyr> <1994May15.085357.2299@unlv.edu>
<-DZrjyI-Od27064yn@io.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: messua.informatik.rwth-aachen.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
shm...@io.org (Shmuel Weidberg) writes:
>In article <1994May15.085357.2...@unlv.edu>, Frank Lofaro wrote:
>>
>> Can stuff currently in the Linux kernel be outlawed due to a new patent?
>> Even though the Linux kernel is pre-existing and thus (?) constitutes
>> "prior art". Or does prior art only apply to prior _patented_ work, and one
>> can patent anything under the sun, unless that stuff is already patented?
>Anything you write is patented.
copyrighted. The form is under protection, not the content. With patents,
the content is protected.
But back to the original question: patenting Linux kernel code would obviously
be not possible, as it constitutes perfect prior art (being published).
Anything published is to be considered prior art.
Now the *real* question is: can the *author* of Linux parts decide later
that he wants to patent his idea he originally submitted (nobody else
can, obviously)? Now kermel things are, I suppose, accepted on the
premise that they stand under the GPL, as the whole work is GPLed.
The disturbing question here would be: can a GPL-submitted piece of
software be later patented? I believe this is against the spirit of
the GPL, but not against the word.
So probably Linus (and other GPL-software coordinators) should demand
a clause withholding later restrictions on use of this software.
That is, even if someone is going to patent an idea of his (which should
be discouraged, but I do not think prohibited), the use of the GPL-software
must not be infringed, including derivative work and the other clauses.
--
David Kastrup d...@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de
Tel: +49-241-72419 Fax: +49-241-79502
Goethestr. 20, D-52064 Aachen
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.admin
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!
cf-cm!cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <1994May16.161618.23028@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <1994May15.085357.2299@unlv.edu> <-DZrjyI-Od27064yn@io.org>
<2r7cv1$gac@urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>
Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 16:16:18 GMT
Lines: 19
In article <2r7cv1$...@urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>
d...@messua.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (David Kastrup) writes:
>Now the *real* question is: can the *author* of Linux parts decide later
>that he wants to patent his idea he originally submitted (nobody else
>can, obviously)? Now kermel things are, I suppose, accepted on the
>premise that they stand under the GPL, as the whole work is GPLed.
You can't patent published work in all normal countries. In all bar one you
can't patent ideas either 8).
>The disturbing question here would be: can a GPL-submitted piece of
>software be later patented? I believe this is against the spirit of
>the GPL, but not against the word.
If a GPL'd item is shown to be patented, then the rights to use it are
invalidated by the patent without permission from the patent owner. The
GPL covers this by invalidating all rights to use the code. Thus if someone
claims a patent on a GPL program, they also can't use the code....
Alan
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!yale.edu!nigel.msen.com!
emory!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uknet!cf-cm!
cybaswan!iiitac
From: iii...@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Message-ID: <1994May17.123930.14302@uk.ac.swan.pyr>
Organization: Swansea University College
References: <2qsudm$brd@harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au>
<TALVOLA.94May13160858@fennel.berkeley.edu> <2r1m5q$qum@Venus.mcs.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 12:39:30 GMT
Lines: 22
In article <2r1m5q$...@Venus.mcs.com> andyd...@MCS.COM (Andrew Deckowitz) writes:
>I too do not see a problem with Novell creating a GUI for Linux. But I
>do have to add a guffaw at the thought of Novell's support actually
>adding value to Linux development. At this time, Novell developer
>support is somewhat of a standing joke. Being an optimist, I do have
>high hopes for Novell's new Enterprise Support Division. Unfortunately
>I am also a cynical realist, and expect to be disappointed.
I've had two recent dealings with Novell for DOS stuff and they were nothing
but helpful and knew roughly what I wanted. Not a match for IBM - few places
I know where you can phone a random IBM tech number and say I want the
specs for NetBEUI and have it ordered and in the post in 5 minutes.
>
Novell:
>Summary: first they will port to UnixWare, then they will produce
>operating-system independent services to allow NetWare features on
>non-NetWare operating systems.
I'm still collecting info on NCP - I reckon I have enough info to
begin attacking the idea of a netware userfs.
Alan