Where results make sense

About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us

USL v. BSDi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia BSDi's claim in their advertising and software license that BSD/386 and the NET-2 code it was derived from "contained no ATandT licensed code" was false, so BSDi was guilty of false advertising and deceptive trade practices. On these grounds, USL asked the court for a preliminary injunction that would bar BSDi and UC Berkeley from distributing the NET-2 software until the outcome of the case was known. BSDi settlement agreement was posted to the Groklaw website, obtained from The Regents of the University of California's Office of the General Counsel under the State of California Public Records Law. en.wikipedia.org /wiki/USL_v._BSDi   (1223 words)

UNIX Systems Laboratories - Wikicompany   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) USL was the plaintiff in the USL v. USL asked the court for a preliminary injunction that would bar BSDi and the UC Berkeley from distributing the NET-2 software until the case was concluded. BSDi was settled out of court 1993 after the judge expressed doubt as to the validity of USL's Intellectual property. www.wikicompany.org /wiki/UNIX_Systems_Laboratories   (172 words)

Unix Encyclopedia Information @ iListening.com   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) The Unix environment and the SSP program model were essential elements in the development of the [5] and the reshaping of computing as centered in Leopard Technology Overview rather than in individual computers. BSDI produced a fully functional commercial version of BSD Unix for the inexpensive and ubiquitous Intel platform, which started a wave of interest in the use of inexpensive hardware for production computing. In 2005, workstations released the bulk of the source code to the 1971, a System V variant, under the name Microsoft Windows, making it the first actively developed commercial Unix system to be January 1 (several years earlier, Caldera had released many of the older Unix systems under an educational and later Mach kernel). www.ilistening.com /encyclopedia/Unix   (5634 words)

[No title] Again, BSDI argues that these instructions are widespread and well-documented, and that their structure is substantially dictated by the need to preserve compatibility with other programs (Joint Decl. However, as shown by the briefs arguing Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction against BSDI, the threshold issues here are not issues of who did what, but rather issues of similarity among source codes, of contract interpretation, and of law. BSDI seeks to carry this burden by proving that AT&T and Plaintiff have widely published 32V without proper notice. cm.bell-labs.com /cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/930303.ruling.txt   (7937 words)

Clinton Goveas :: Wikipedia Reference Shortly after it was founded, Bill Jolitz left BSDI to pursue distribution of 386BSD, the free software ancestor of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. By 1993 most commercial vendors had changed their variants of Unix to be based on System V with many BSD features added on top. BSDi), it was clarified that Berkeley had the right to distribute BSD Unix — for free, if it so desired. www.clintongoveas.com /wikipedia/?title=Unix   (5360 words)

unix - Article and Reference from OnPedia.com BSDI was the first company to produce a fully-functional commercial version of BSD UNIX for the inexpensive and ubiquitous Intel platform, which started a wave of interest in the use of inexpensive hardware for production computing. Shortly after it was founded, Bill Jolitz left BSDI to pursue distribution of 386BSD, commonly identified as the freeware ancestor of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. Shortly after UNIX System V Release 4 was produced AT&T sold all its rights to UNIX to Novell. www.onpedia.com /encyclopedia/Unix   (2699 words)

Groklaw - The Daemon, the GNU and the Penguin - Ch. 13 ~ by Dr. Peter H. Salus USL v The Regents of the University of California USL subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration, asking the District Court to hold a new hearing on whether USL had published 32V without a copyright notice. USL argued that the Court's prior ruling was based on an incorrect finding as to the number of copies distributed. www.groklaw.net /articlebasic.php?story=20050623114426823   (1914 words)

USL v. BSDI, 1994   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) USL and USL's predecessor in interest, the American Telephone and Telegraph Co. ("ATandT"), have licensed the University to use certain versions of UNIX® system software, prepare derivative works therefrom, and to distribute such works according to the terms of the parties' license agreements. USL hereby represents and warrants that the execution, delivery, and performance of this Settlement Agreement has been duly authorized by all necessary action, and that the individual who executes this Settlement Agreement on USL's behalf is duly authorized to do so. USL hereby represents and warrants that the software delivered to the University pursuant to Section 2(b) of this Settlement Agreement is a true and authentic copy of System V, Release 4.0 of the UNIX System. healconsulting.com /SCO/USL_v_BSDI_1994.html   (2809 words)

php-deluxe.net - description BSD OS   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) BSD/OS BSD/OS (also known as BSDi and BSD/386) was a commercial version of the Berkeley Software Distribution operating system that had been developed by the University of California, Berkeley s Computer Science Research Group in the 1970s and 1980s. As part of the settlement of the USL v. BSDi, BSDi substituted code that had been written for the University s 4.4 BSD Lite for disputed code in their OS, effective with version 2.0. www.php-deluxe.net /encyclopedia,index.page,BSD-OS.htm   (307 words)

'Debian School' *nix licensing text Part III USL sought to get an injunction to halt BSDI's sales until the lawsuit was resolved, claiming that they would suffer irreparable harm from the loss of their trade secrets if the BSDI distributions continued." [Twenty Years of Berkeley Unix McKusick]. The judge agreed with BSDI's argument and told USL that they would have to restate their complaint based solely on the six files or he would dismiss it. With some further prodding by Ray Noorda on the USL side, many of the sticking points were removed and a settlement was finally reached in January 1994. www.infohelp.co.nz /dsltxt3.html   (2517 words)

IP-WARS.NET || Comments || Is O'Gara Really Pro-Sco?   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) BSDI, which the USL suit suggests is in collusion with CSRG, declines to publicly identify any of its founders or investors declaring such information "proprietary" on the basis that BSDI is a closely held company. Clearly USL will argue that CSRG staff gave themselves permission to commercialise the system and will doubtless note a violation of the university's established code of ethics which requires university personnel with a financial interest in a university decision to disqualify themselves. BSDI, meanwhile, is attempting to try the case in the court of public opinion. www.ip-wars.net /comments/2004/12/30/112935/51/6/post   (2191 words)

Gatorsports.com :: 100 years of Gator Football   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) AT&T's Unix System Laboratories subsidiary filed suit against BSDi in New Jersey in April of 1990, a suit that was later amended to include The Regents of the University of California. BSDi's claim in their advertising and software license that BSD/386 and the NET-2 code it was derived from "contained no AT&T licensed code" was false, so BSDi was guilty of false advertising and deceptive trade practices. The University also claimed that similar lines of source code (which were presented during discovery) did not infringe on USL's copyright because they had become public domain by the actions of AT&T: AT&T had promoted UNIX as a standard, licensing it to universities and allowing UNIX source code to be published in textbooks. www.gatorsports.com /apps/pbcs.dll/section?template=wiki&text=USL_v._BSDi   (1453 words)

BSDi - CompWisdom   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) BSDI was formed by members of the Computer Systems Research Group (CSRG) at UC Berkeley (i.e., the same group responsible for the Unix BSD in the first place). BSDI produce, market, and provide support and training for a commercial BSD Unix (or Unix-like) OS for the Intel platform, and as such, are competing in the same space that FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and Linux (not to mention Microsoft) all play in. BSDi is the owner of the BSD/OS, the version of Unix that's a close relative to open-source projects FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD. www.compwisdom.com /topics/BSDi   (3571 words)

Documents about USL vs. BSDI   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) In view of the interest in the newly-launched suit by SCO against IBM, I thought it might be of interest to make available some of the documents from an earlier case. Here USL, at the time the owner of a predecessor of the intellectual property now controlled by SCO, sued BSD Incorporated. A Groklaw contributor, one 'dburns', recently (Dec 2004) obtained a copy of the settlement (signed 2/4/1994) between USL and UCB of the matter: the PDF version of the whole thing is copied here; the Groklaw site (www.groklaw.com) has a text rendition and their commentary. cm.bell-labs.com /cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/bsdisuit.htm   (436 words)

SCO goes after BSD? 8) USL's primary legal theory at the time was "trade secret disclosure"; however, trade secret law states that no matter how a secret is disclosed, once it is disclosed, it is no longer a secret. It's not clear that their sale of USL would permit USL to later claim intellectual property from conversion of illegally accumulated assets. Originally they sent a cease and desist order to everyone they could find, Jordan included, and there was no grace period for continuing to ship code (like BSDI was being allowed) until the 4.4-Lite code was made available. lists.freebsd.org /pipermail/freebsd-advocacy/2003-November/000740.html   (833 words)

Groklaw at AllExperts One result of the Groklaw/Grokline work was obtaining and publishing the 1994 settlement in USL v. BSDi [1], which for over a decade had been sealed by the parties. The document was obtained through a California Open Access statute (the university being a publicly funded institution is required by law to make almost all of its documents public), and the release of the settlement answered many questions as to the ownership of the Unix Intellectual Property. en.allexperts.com /e/g/gr/groklaw.htm   (1146 words)

GrokLaw: Is There a Curse on UNIX or Something? BSDI seeks to carry this burden by proving that ATandT and Plaintiff have widely published 32V without proper notice. Compare what Stowell said, that the copyright notices were stripped and were supposed to be "reinserted", with the answers given in USL's responses to BSDi's second set of Interrogatories from USL v BSDi, Interrogatory 6, one of the documents we now have obtained: There was reportedly another clause in the agreement, namely that USL was never to sue anyone using 4.4 BSD-Lite as the base for their system. gl.scofacts.org /gl-20031128153414688.html   (3353 words)

SCO's Tapestry of Lies BSDI court case of the early 1990's, in which ATT's Unix System Labs was found not to have a defensible copyright interest in Unix. In fact, when the very similar USL v. BSDI lawsuit came up in the early 1990's, Noorda himself brokered the settlement between ATT's Unix System Labs and the University of California, so that Unix could go on without ambiguity. www.perens.com /SCO/March2004.html   (1547 words)

[ gilbert fernandes\usl vs bsd ]   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) but thanks to a groklaw contributor (dburns) a copy has been recently obtained of that settlement, which is signed 2/4/1994 between USL and UCB on that matter. USL-UCB 1994 agreement (pdf, 2.1 mb) [ gzipped pdf here (1.6 mb) ] the agreement is pretty clear on the fact that by signing the agreement and putting the mutual lawsuits behind, novell agreed that anyone based on 4.4 lite 2 going forward would be free and clear. the ip which connected bsd with the suit is derived from pre-system v and system iii versions of unix. gilb.nerim.net /usl_bsd/index.html   (230 words)

UnixSecur.com - Unix In 1995, the business of administration and support of the existing UNIX licenses plus rights to further develop the System V code base were transferred to the Santa Cruz Operation. BSDi), it was clarified that Berkeley had the right to distribute BSD Unix — for free, if it so desired. In October 1993, Novell, the company that owned the rights to the Unix System V source at the time, transferred the trademarks of Unix to the X/Open Company (now The Open Group), and in 1995 sold the related business operations to Santa Cruz Operation. www.unixsecur.com /unix   (4590 words)

Unix at AllExperts In 1984, an industry group called X/Open was formed, with the aim of forming compatible open systems, that is, standardize the UNIX systems. AT&T added various features into UNIX System V, such as file locking, system administration, job control (modelled on ITS), streams, the Remote File System and TLI. In 1995, the business of administration and support of the existing UNIX licenses plus rights to further develop the System V code base were sold by Novell to the Santa Cruz Operation.[4] Whether Novell also sold the copyrights is currently the subject of litigation (see below). en.allexperts.com /e/u/un/unix.htm   (5003 words)

[No title]   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) In SCO v Novell failed to produce a copyright transfer document as proof that copyrights had ever transferred from Novell to Santa Cruz. In 1993 Federal Judge Debevoise wrote a finding in the USL v BSDI case which remarked that ATandT's lax treatment of the (v32 Unix, from which SysV is mostly derived) code for Unix would very likely result in a finding that it had lapsed to public domain. This implies that any copyright action regarding that code will need to establish a specific chain of ownership for the specific disputed code; in the case of code in SysV and antecedant unix that would be *very* difficult. www.zensden.net /boredz/xmsg/view/1/88   (227 words)

Add new comment | Linux Journal The previous USL v BSDI suit may also prove to be a force that the courts can not exclude... Bach's book discloses the algorithms and data structures used internally within the System V kernel; Rochkind is a tutorial on the system call interface. It could be that SCO's lawyers found that some Linux kernel code is similar to its System V counterpart (the so-called "obfuscated" infringement), which wouldn't be surprising because Linus has acknowledged using Bach's book as a reference, along with the POSIX specification. www.linuxjournal.com /comment/reply/6877/8327   (707 words)

GrokLaw: Linus Corrects McKusick First of all, whatever is in the secret agreement between BSDi and USL is a secret of their own choice. And now to the BSDi lawsuit and SCO's claims that there were 91 files affected, here is Marshall Kirk McKusick, who was a participant in that litigation, on the way it really was from his perspective: SCO mischaracterizes the BSDi case, to my reckoning, in their recent letters, making it sound like BSDI was at fault, whereas Judge Debevois' opinion indicated that he didn't think USL had a copyright in 32V: gl.scofacts.org /gl-20031230003833680.html   (2346 words)

[No title]   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20) Eventually, the systems that Berkeley students had developed for their research had replaced almost every component of the ATandT UNIX system, and in the early 1990s the full Berkeley source code was released to the public under the BSD License. BSDi, which was settled almost entirely in Berkeley's favor, conclusively establishing BSD's free nature. While the lawsuit was still pending however, it cast a significant doubt over whether the Berkeley distribution would remain free. www.brujula.net /english/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution.html   (989 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us   Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.