Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!
ee.und.ac.za!inet.up.ac.za!hwposer
From: hwpo...@dreamcoat.ee.up.ac.za (Rolf HW Poser)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Come now... Where's 1.1 Relese ?
Date: 3 Apr 1994 15:44:32 GMT
Organization: University of Pretoria
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <2nmo90$ncc@inet.up.ac.za>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dreamcoat.ee.up.ac.za
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hi Folks !

You said the 13th of March, then you said the end of the month so that some
court proceedings could come to an end. Well - we're still waiting, and we 
would all really appreciate the full release, because there are machines
waiting,  installations waiting, prople waiting etc....

Rather give yourself lots of time (OK - reasonable amounts of time, not like the
Whine project - which is due out in 1999 maybe), than giving people
false hopes...

So , when is 1.1 Release due ?

Cheers,
Rolf HW Poser

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEng. Chem 4, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
email : Rolf.Po...@ee.up.ac.za
Fidonet : Rolf.Poser%p23.f22.n7106.z5.fidonet....@catpe.alt.za
Tel : +27-12-420-3134 (w)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!
uknet!EU.net!ieunet!news.ieunet.ie!jkh
From: j...@whisker.hubbard.ie (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: Come now... Where's 1.1 Relese ?
Date: 03 Apr 1994 17:53:14 GMT
Organization: Jordan Hubbard
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <JKH.94Apr3185314@whisker.hubbard.ie>
References: <2nmo90$ncc@inet.up.ac.za>
NNTP-Posting-Host: whisker.hubbard.ie
In-reply-to: hwposer@dreamcoat.ee.up.ac.za's message of 3 Apr 1994 15:44:32 GMT

In article <2nmo90$...@inet.up.ac.za> hwpo...@dreamcoat.ee.up.ac.za (Rolf HW Poser) 
writes:

   Hi Folks !

   You said the 13th of March, then you said the end of the month so that some
   court proceedings could come to an end. Well - we're still waiting, and we 
   would all really appreciate the full release, because there are machines
   waiting,  installations waiting, prople waiting etc....

I understand.  If you know anything at all concerning the legal
profession, then you'll know that it never moves as fast as one would
like.  Believe me, we'd LOVE to do a full release, but we cannot until
USL gives us the go-ahead.  On the most positive side, it could be a
week or two.  On the most negative, it could kill 1.1 entirely,
causing us to wait for the 4.4 lite tape to be released so that we can
reengineer the bits in dispute.  This would see 1.2 released sometime
in June or July.

We're not `giving ourselves lots of time', USL is giving us no time at
all, and this is what we're trying to negotiate.  Please be patient
and try to imagine how we must feel about this after having 1.1 ready
to go all these weeks.

					Jordan
--
Jordan K. Hubbard	FreeBSD core team	Raving lunatic

Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!
munnari.oz.au!news.uwa.edu.au!DIALix!not-for-mail
From: datac...@perth.DIALix.oz.au (Datacraft Technology)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: Come now... Where's 1.1 Relese ?
Date: 4 Apr 1994 21:52:27 +0800
Organization: DIALix Services, Perth, Western Australia
Lines: 49
Sender: datac...@perth.DIALix.oz.au
Message-ID: <2np62r$8vo$1@perth.dialix.oz.au>
References: <2nmo90$ncc@inet.up.ac.za> <JKH.94Apr3185314@whisker.hubbard.ie>
NNTP-Posting-Host: perth.dialix.oz.au
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5 (NOV)

In <JKH.94Apr3185...@whisker.hubbard.ie> j...@whisker.hubbard.ie (Jordan K. Hubbard) 
writes:

>In article <2nmo90$...@inet.up.ac.za> hwpo...@dreamcoat.ee.up.ac.za (Rolf HW Poser) 
>writes:

>   Hi Folks !

>   You said the 13th of March, then you said the end of the month so that some
>   court proceedings could come to an end. Well - we're still waiting, and we 
>   would all really appreciate the full release, because there are machines
>   waiting,  installations waiting, prople waiting etc....

>I understand.  If you know anything at all concerning the legal
>profession, then you'll know that it never moves as fast as one would
>like.  Believe me, we'd LOVE to do a full release, but we cannot until
>USL gives us the go-ahead.  On the most positive side, it could be a
>week or two.  On the most negative, it could kill 1.1 entirely,

Why do we need the "go-ahead" from USL ?????

Net-2 is still available from most FTP sites which had it previously. If
anything then USL might hassle those sites. {Free,Net}BSD have evolved
so far from the original Net-2 that USL couldn't get a handle at us anyway.
What could they do anyway - take away my PC ?

If USL can hassle US FTP sites. Why don't we just set up a site outside of
the US ?

Does anybody (apart from USL) know what bits of Net-2 they claim is theirs ?
If yes please let us know. A few days and we should be able to rewrite the
few routines.

>causing us to wait for the 4.4 lite tape to be released so that we can
>reengineer the bits in dispute.  This would see 1.2 released sometime
>in June or July.

>We're not `giving ourselves lots of time', USL is giving us no time at
>all, and this is what we're trying to negotiate.  Please be patient
>and try to imagine how we must feel about this after having 1.1 ready
>to go all these weeks.

How close is 1.1-BETA and 1.1 ? Are there patches to bring 1.1-BETA to 1.1 ?
If yes how do I get them ?

>					Jordan
>--
>Jordan K. Hubbard	FreeBSD core team	Raving lunatic

Tibor Sashegyi

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: gmd.de!urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de!newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de!
hrz-ws11.hrz.uni-kassel.de!news.th-darmstadt.de!zib-berlin.de!news.rrz.uni-hamburg.de!
news.dkrz.de!dscomsa.desy.de!CERN.ch!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!ames!decwrl!
decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!hasty
From: ha...@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr)
Subject: USL vs. 386bsd derivatives
Message-ID: <hastyCo01t4.3K3@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: comp.unix.bsd
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 1994 16:00:40 GMT
Lines: 20


Hi,

I saw a couple of postings on comp.os.386bsd.questions that USL wants
distributors of 386bsd derivatives to stop distribution!

Has anyone of the NetBSD team been contacted?

Does anyone knows what is going on from the USL side?

I find the current situation a bit odd because USL vs BSDI & UCB lawsuits
are over...

	Thanks
	Amancio
-- 
FREE unix, gcc, tcp/ip, X, open-look, interviews, tcl/tk, MIME, midi, sound
at  freebsd.cdrom.com:/pub/FreeBSD
Amancio Hasty,  Consultant |
Home: (415) 495-3046       |  
e-mail ha...@netcom.com	   |  ftp-site depository of all my work:    
aha...@cisco.com           |  sunvis.rtpnc.epa.gov:/pub/386bsd/X

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!
sgiblab!majipoor.cygnus.com!kithrup.com!sef
From: s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
Subject: Re: USL vs. 386bsd derivatives
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
References: <hastyCo01t4.3K3@netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Co05D8.8Ax@kithrup.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 1994 17:17:17 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <hastyCo01t4....@netcom.com> ha...@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) writes:
"comp.unix.bsd" is an invalid distribution.  Setting 'Distribution: ' to
'comp.unix.bsd' has guaranteed that a growing number of sites around the
world either drop or will not forward your article.

>I find the current situation a bit odd because USL vs BSDI & UCB lawsuits
>are over...

The (public parts of the) settlement allow BSDi, and BSDi *alone*, to
distribute most of Net/2, although there are a handful of files they may
only distribute in binary form.  Because of the settlement, UCB no longer
has the ability to defend anyone who continues to distribute Net/2.
(In fact, UCB is currently in violation of the settlement for continuing
to distribute Net/2-derived systems.)

Anyone who continues to distribute Net/2 or Net/2-derived code (any part
of it, mind you) runs the risk of having to deal with USL.  And because
UCB can no longer defend the tape, anyone who does so had either better have
very deep pockets, or be willing to have a temporary or permanent restraining
order thrown against them.

With any luck, 4.4BSD-Lite will come out any day now.  The person doing it
is probably sick and tired of the whole thing by now, and probably wants it
out as much as anyone else, if not more.

For the free BSD's, after it comes out, there is then the decision of whether
to completely rewrite the files and functions that are missing from it, or
to use the (possibly unaccaptable to USL) ones currently in their trees.
Either way, I would expect a minimum of two or three weeks to do it, and
maybe as much as three or four months.

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.misc
Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!agate!ames!decwrl!
decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!tgm
From: t...@netcom.com (Thomas G. McWilliams)
Subject: Re: USL vs. 386bsd derivatives
Message-ID: <tgmCo0CB0.77A@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <hastyCo01t4.3K3@netcom.com>
Distribution: comp.unix.bsd
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 1994 19:47:24 GMT
Lines: 26

Amancio Hasty Jr (ha...@netcom.com) wrote:

: Hi,
: I saw a couple of postings on comp.os.386bsd.questions that USL wants
: distributors of 386bsd derivatives to stop distribution!
: Has anyone of the NetBSD team been contacted?
: Does anyone knows what is going on from the USL side?
: I find the current situation a bit odd because USL vs BSDI & UCB lawsuits
: are over...

Actually the outcome of the lawsuit was to encumber the Net/2
sources.  The primary copyright holders, Univ. of California and
Novell, *both* have requested the halt of distributions of Net/2
derivatives. The 4.4BSD/lite distribution was suggested as the
substitution. The statement released be the University of
California asked that free distributions be based solely on the
unencumbered 4.4/lite. Part of the reason is that UCB has relinquished
copyright claim to portions of the Net/2 tree. These portions
now must display a Novell copyright, and evidently Novell seems
to be serious about cracking down on copyright violators.
Several CD-Rom distributors have already been contacted. Use of
the Net/2 tree now requires formal licensing and $$$.

Thomas
t...@netcom.com

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!
netcomsv!netcom.com!hasty
From: ha...@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr)
Subject: Re: Come now... Where's 1.1 Relese ?
Message-ID: <hastyCo2EyH.CMp@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <2np62r$8vo$1@perth.dialix.oz.au> <CnwC7I.JLG@latcs1.lat.oz.au> 
<Co20tJ.KK9.3@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 22:39:52 GMT
Lines: 62

Perhaps this would begin to shed some light into the current situation...

From: t...@netcom.com (Thomas G. McWilliams)
Subject: Re: USL vs. 386bsd derivatives

Amancio Hasty Jr (ha...@netcom.com) wrote:

: Hi,
: I saw a couple of postings on comp.os.386bsd.questions that USL wants
: distributors of 386bsd derivatives to stop distribution!
: Has anyone of the NetBSD team been contacted?
: Does anyone knows what is going on from the USL side?
: I find the current situation a bit odd because USL vs BSDI & UCB lawsuits
: are over...

Actually the outcome of the lawsuit was to encumber the Net/2
sources.  The primary copyright holders, Univ. of California and
Novell, *both* have requested the halt of distributions of Net/2
derivatives. The 4.4BSD/lite distribution was suggested as the
substitution. The statement released be the University of
California asked that free distributions be based solely on the
unencumbered 4.4/lite. Part of the reason is that UCB has relinquished
copyright claim to portions of the Net/2 tree. These portions
now must display a Novell copyright, and evidently Novell seems
to be serious about cracking down on copyright violators.
Several CD-Rom distributors have already been contacted. Use of
the Net/2 tree now requires formal licensing and $$$.

From: s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan)
In article <hastyCo01t4....@netcom.com> ha...@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) writes:

>I find the current situation a bit odd because USL vs BSDI & UCB lawsuits
>are over...

The (public parts of the) settlement allow BSDi, and BSDi *alone*, to
distribute most of Net/2, although there are a handful of files they may
only distribute in binary form.  Because of the settlement, UCB no longer
has the ability to defend anyone who continues to distribute Net/2.
(In fact, UCB is currently in violation of the settlement for continuing
to distribute Net/2-derived systems.)

Anyone who continues to distribute Net/2 or Net/2-derived code (any part
of it, mind you) runs the risk of having to deal with USL.  And because
UCB can no longer defend the tape, anyone who does so had either better have
very deep pockets, or be willing to have a temporary or permanent restraining
order thrown against them.

With any luck, 4.4BSD-Lite will come out any day now.  The person doing it
is probably sick and tired of the whole thing by now, and probably wants it
out as much as anyone else, if not more.

For the free BSD's, after it comes out, there is then the decision of whether
to completely rewrite the files and functions that are missing from it, or
to use the (possibly unaccaptable to USL) ones currently in their trees.
Either way, I would expect a minimum of two or three weeks to do it, and
maybe as much as three or four months.

-- 
FREE unix, gcc, tcp/ip, X, open-look, interviews, tcl/tk, MIME, midi, sound
at  freebsd.cdrom.com:/pub/FreeBSD
Amancio Hasty,  Consultant |
Home: (415) 495-3046       |  
e-mail ha...@netcom.com	   |  ftp-site depository of all my work:    
aha...@cisco.com           |  sunvis.rtpnc.epa.gov:/pub/386bsd/X

Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!
swrinde!sgiblab!munnari.oz.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!
news.uwa.edu.au!info.curtin.edu.au!cproto
From: cpr...@cs.curtin.edu.au (Computer Protocol)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: UCB and USL/NOVELL settlement
Date: 10 Apr 94 13:08:58 GMT
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <cproto.765983338@marsh>
NNTP-Posting-Host: marsh.cs.curtin.edu.au
Summary: UCB and USL/NOVELL settlement
Keywords: UCB USL NOVELL

t...@netcom.com (Thomas G. McWilliams) writes:

>Amancio Hasty Jr (ha...@netcom.com) wrote:

>: Hi,
>: I saw a couple of postings on comp.os.386bsd.questions that USL wants
>: distributors of 386bsd derivatives to stop distribution!
>: Has anyone of the NetBSD team been contacted?
>: Does anyone knows what is going on from the USL side?
>: I find the current situation a bit odd because USL vs BSDI & UCB lawsuits
>: are over...

>Actually the outcome of the lawsuit was to encumber the Net/2
>sources.  The primary copyright holders, Univ. of California and
>Novell, *both* have requested the halt of distributions of Net/2
>derivatives. The 4.4BSD/lite distribution was suggested as the
>substitution. The statement released be the University of
>California asked that free distributions be based solely on the
>unencumbered 4.4/lite. Part of the reason is that UCB has relinquished
>copyright claim to portions of the Net/2 tree. These portions

Why did UCB do this ??? Bloody traitors.

>now must display a Novell copyright, and evidently Novell seems
>to be serious about cracking down on copyright violators.

So now NOVELL is the new "Deathstar". Lets boycot the bastards. I have to 
decide on a major new enterprise wide network. IT WON'T BE NOVELL. I'm 
considering BANYAN. Any ideas.

Is there any chance of NOVELL/USL being able to prevent us here in Australia
from putting NET/2 or {Free,Net,386}BSD up for FTP or even publishing the
CDROMs?

Is there anybody at UCB or BSDI willing to give us access to the "secret"
parts of the settlement? There are ways of posting it anonymously. I 
believe a reasonably large number of people would have knowledge of these
"secret" parts.

Also is there anybody who knows which parts are affected by Novells copy-
rights?

>Several CD-Rom distributors have already been contacted. Use of
>the Net/2 tree now requires formal licensing and $$$.

>Thomas
>t...@netcom.com

Tibor Sashegyi (cpr...@cs.curtin.edu.au)

Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!
news.cc.swarthmore.edu!psuvax1.cse.psu.edu!news.ecn.bgu.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!
howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!pa.dec.com!usenet.pa.dec.com!jkh
From: j...@sentnl.ilo.dec.com (Jordan Hubbard)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: UCB and USL/NOVELL settlement
Date: 18 Apr 1994 16:39:27 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Galway Ireland
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <JKH.94Apr18173927@sentnl.ilo.dec.com>
References: <cproto.765983338@marsh>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sentnl.ilo.dec.com
In-reply-to: cproto@cs.curtin.edu.au's message of 10 Apr 94 13:08:58 GMT

In article <cproto.765983338@marsh> cpr...@cs.curtin.edu.au (Computer Protocol) writes:

   So now NOVELL is the new "Deathstar". Lets boycot the bastards. I have to 
   decide on a major new enterprise wide network. IT WON'T BE NOVELL. I'm 
   considering BANYAN. Any ideas.

Just to set this particular record straight - in talking with Burt
Levine, who is USL's senior legal council, I have been very favorably
impressed with his willingness to negotiate with us, even to the
extend of spending reasonably large portions of his (what must be very
expensive) time to try and work out a reasonable compromise.

USL could have just put the boot down and said "HALT."  They did not.
What they have done instead is talk to us (well me, anyway) about the
immediate and future needs of FreeBSD vs those of USL, and what kind
of arrangements might be made in order to keep both sides happy.
Considering that we're really nothing more than a group of guys who
bang this stuff out for fun, their willingness to treat us as
legitimate entities in our own right and negotiate with us at all is
somewhat surprising.

Needless to say, this attitude in any company, much less one the size
of Novell, deserves a certain degree of praise.  They're not the
Deathstar, nor do I believe they can afford to be ("USL sues small
group of non-profit UNIX developers, claims UNIX is an Open System!
:-)") and I believe they know this.

				Jordan

Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!
ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!mycroft
From: mycr...@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: UCB and USL/NOVELL settlement
Date: 20 Apr 1994 18:22:14 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <MYCROFT.94Apr20142215@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
References: <cproto.765983338@marsh>
NNTP-Posting-Host: duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu
In-reply-to: cproto@cs.curtin.edu.au's message of 10 Apr 94 13:08:58 GMT


In article <cproto.765983338@marsh> cpr...@cs.curtin.edu.au (Computer
Protocol) writes:

   >Actually the outcome of the lawsuit was to encumber the Net/2
   >sources.

   Why did UCB do this ??? Bloody traitors.

You forget 2 things:

1) The Net/2 sources are already encumbered, in that you must replace
them within one year of the release of 4.4Lite if you are distributing
the source.

2) THEY WROTE THE DAMNED CODE.

   >now must display a Novell copyright,

That's a USL copyright, and it does not affect distribution of the
code.

--
- Charles Hannum
  NetBSD group
  Working ports: i386, hp300, amiga, sparc, mac68k, pc532.
  In progress: pmax, sun3.

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!festival!
edcogsci!richard
From: rich...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin)
Subject: Re: UCB and USL/NOVELL settlement
Message-ID: <CoLvp3.AGy@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh
References: <cproto.765983338@marsh> <MYCROFT.94Apr20142215@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 10:55:50 GMT
Lines: 18

In article <MYCROFT.94Apr20142...@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> 
mycr...@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) writes:
>1) The Net/2 sources are already encumbered, in that you must replace
>them within one year of the release of 4.4Lite if you are distributing
>the source.

Could you elaborate on this?  USL *assert* that the Net/2 sources
contain their code, but there is no reason to suppose that they are
legally in the right about this.  Net/2 was distributed without any
rule about replacing it with 4.4Lite and UCB cannot impose any such
condition retroactively.

So, where does this one-year rule come from?

-- Richard
-- 
Richard Tobin, HCRC, Edinburgh University                 R.To...@ed.ac.uk

"Your monkey has got it right, sir."  - HHGTTG

Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!EU.net!
Germany.EU.net!lemis!grog
From: g...@lemis.uucp (Greg Lehey)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: UCB and USL/NOVELL settlement
Message-ID: <3110@adagio.lemis.uucp>
Date: 24 Apr 94 10:07:30 GMT
References: <cproto.765983338@marsh> <MYCROFT.94Apr20142215@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> 
<CoLvp3.AGy@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd
Organization: LEMIS, W-6324 Feldatal, Germany
Lines: 30

In article <CoLvp3....@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> rich...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) writes:
>In article <MYCROFT.94Apr20142...@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> 
mycr...@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) writes:
>>1) The Net/2 sources are already encumbered, in that you must replace
>>them within one year of the release of 4.4Lite if you are distributing
>>the source.
>
>Could you elaborate on this?  USL *assert* that the Net/2 sources
>contain their code, but there is no reason to suppose that they are
>legally in the right about this.

I've compared some of the Net/2 and 7th edition code mentioned in the
USL/BSDI settlement and found some minor similarities in code that
could have been written by a first year CS student. It's completely
unimportant to the function of the system, and could easily (in an
hour or so, in the file I looked at) have been replaced. But it
wasn't. I believe that USL is correct in stating that these functions
were derived from code which now belongs to USL. I believe that they
are incorrect in stating that this has resulted in any damage
whatsoever to USL or any of their partners.

I wish the hell the suits would get this notion out of their
collective heads that any code, once written, is the word of God. If
they believe this, why do they treat the people who write it so
disdainfully?

-- 
---------------------------------------------
Greg Lehey              | Tel:  +49-6637-1488              
LEMIS, Schellnhausen 2, | Fax:  +49-6637-1489
36325 Feldatal, Germany | Mail: g...@lemis.de

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/