Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix! tekecs!mcg From: mcg@tekecs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Unix source code... Message-ID: <1410@tekecs.UUCP> Date: Tue, 14-Jun-83 16:15:24 EDT Article-I.D.: tekecs.1410 Posted: Tue Jun 14 16:15:24 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 16-Jun-83 01:24:22 EDT Lines: 49 WRT Lauren's note about submitting UNIX source code to the net: ------- Forwarded Message Date: 14 Jun 1983 at 1311-PDT (Tuesday) From: mcg (Steven McGeady) To: tektronix!"vortex!lauren"@LBL-CSAM,tektronix!lauren@UCLA-SECURITY Subject: Re: Unix source code... In-reply-to: Your message of Tuesday, 14-Jun-83 04:18:44 PDT. My message contained less code that is typically contained in "bug fixes" to the kernel and various other software. Although there are no explicit references, I have always followed the rule that if someone cannot construct a program or any major algorithms from the distributed code, it is OK to distribute. Thus, this rule prevents someone from sending even a few lines if those few lines embody an algorithm which is important to the application. On the other hand, it would allow someone to send nearly a whole module, if it was impossible to deduce the remainder of the code. I have given a fair amount of thought to this, and believe that I acted in good faith, providing an exposition that few (if any) persons without UUCP source code could benefit from. This is also consistent with the practice of distributing bug fixes over the network. If you have a different view of the legalities of the situation, or (better yet) personal experience which would invalidate my position, I would be interested in hearing about it. I'm certainly not saying I'm not possibly wrong, I just don't see it yet. S. McGeady - stevenm.tektronix@rand-relay Tektronix, Inc. P.s.: BTW, since my submission was made from the USENET, rather than from ARPA, the moderator would only get the choice as to whether to distribute it to ARPA or not, if that. The message would have been already flying around the UUCP part of the network. ------- End of Forwarded Message
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!mit-eddi!mit-vax!eagle!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs! sri-unix!lauren@rand-unix From: lauren%rand-unix@sri-unix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Unix Source Code Message-ID: <2262@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Fri, 17-Jun-83 04:55:00 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.2262 Posted: Fri Jun 17 04:55:00 1983 Date-Received: Sun, 19-Jun-83 17:16:10 EDT Lines: 20 My earlier reply on this topic was not CC'd to this list, so let me comment briefly here. I recently (in a private message) expressed some concern over the insertion of Unix source code "fragments" into messages, usually in the form of "bug fixes". While I fully agree that the network represents a useful medium for the dissemination of bug repairs, I'd like to make sure that some users don't forget that, according to the letter of the Unix license agreements, the sending of source code to persons not similarly licensed is not permitted. While "fragments" might be viewed differently, I for one wouldn't want to be the one trying to decide where to draw the line, and I have already seen some cases (over on Usenet) where substantial portions of licensed source code may have been rather freely distributed. The moral here, I guess, is to please be careful when sending messages that involve Unix source. If anybody out there really understands the contractual issues involved in this topic, I'm sure we'd all appreciate hearing from you. Thanks for your attention... --Lauren--