Returned mail

[MAILER-DAEMON@ncrcan.canada.NCR.COM MAILER-DAEMON@ncrcan.canada.NCR.COM]

Your mail could not be delivered because of the following reason:


   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
Executing: /usr/lib/mail/localmail gnenych
/usr/lib/mail/localmail: IO error copying message: No space left on device
server "/usr/lib/mail/localmail" failed - input/output error

   ----- Unsent message follows -----
>From ncrgw1!cse.psu.edu!9fans Wed Apr 12 00:30 EDT 1995 remote from ncrhub4
Received: by ncrhub4.ATTGIS.COM; 12 Apr 95 00:30:18 EDT
Received: by ncrgw1.ATTGIS.COM; 11 Apr 95 23:35:21 EDT
Received: by psuvax1.cse.psu.edu id <34090>; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:11:12 -0400
Received: from plg.uwaterloo.ca ([129.97.140.10]) by psuvax1.cse.psu.edu with SMTP id <34095>; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:07:01 -0400
Received: by plg.uwaterloo.ca id <23549>; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:03:02 -0400
From:	Dave Mason <dmason@plg.uwaterloo.ca>
To:	9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Plan 9 encumbrance
In-Reply-To: <95Apr9.002400edt.45919@colossus.cse.psu.edu>
References: <95Apr9.002400edt.45919@colossus.cse.psu.edu>
Message-Id: <95Apr11.200302edt.23549@plg.uwaterloo.ca>
Date:	Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:02:56 -0400
Sender: owner-9fans@cse.psu.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu

dmr@plan9.att.com writes:
> The terms of the new Plan 9 distribution will be much more liberal
[... and look completely reasonable ]

> By contrast, Unix source licenses were and are fearsome documents,
> with references to trade-secret "methods and concepts" and
> restrictions on use even for educational purposes.
> 
> Fundamentally, USL sued BSDI and then UC Berkeley for producing
> a Unix clone (and lost).  BSDI and UCB's CSRG thought this
> was a worthwhile thing to do because the real thing was overpriced
> and hard to get.  Plan 9 will be cheap and easy to get.
> Situations change, and we learn.

My question is: If I get and read and enjoy your distribution, and
then decide I want to write a commercial equivalent of some part of
Plan 9 (say my own implementation of Alef to run under Windows-NT --
don't worry, I already went and washed my mouth out), what will AT&T
and/or its lawyers say about it?  Or I think I see how to build the
kernel better?  As an OS researcher, this is a *very* relevant
question for me.  While the USL silliness was going on I was thanking
my lucky stars that I'd never looked at any Unix system code.

What about the authors of vsta (a plan-9 inspired system about to
release version 1.4)?  Must they *not* look at the plan-9 code?  They
currently don't use exactly the message format that plan-9
does... what if they change to use the right one?

Very much looking forward to the release... if I can look at it.
../Dave