From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Clem Cole <email@example.com> Cc: Computer Old Farts Followers <firstname.lastname@example.org>, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [COFF] [TUHS] 386BSD released Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:40:53 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YO8hpZ4VYln+QxNb@mit.edu> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAC20D2NDPLZQ25GfYq7Yi1XQj9BEJJY0gLQB3nb5Z2bM66wM8A@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 11:01:58AM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: > By formal definition, the tarball and the rest of UNIX from Research is and > always has been, '*Open Source*' in the sources were available. *But they > were licensed*. This was fairly typical of much early software BTW. The > binary nature only came about with the minicomputers. It may have been "Open Source" by your definition, but there is a very specific definition of "Open Source(tm)" and it has always been, from the beginning, defined to mean code licensed under terms which meet the Open Source Definition (OSD). The AT&T license, for better or for worse does not mean the terms of the OSD.  https://opensource.org/osd > The sources in the tarball were not '*Free and Open Source*' -- which > becomes the crux of the issue. [Sadly the OSS folks have confused this > over the years and that important detail is lost]. Hardly. "Free and Open Source" (FOSS) is a term which developed *after* the the term "Open Source" was coined and trademarked. That term was not created by the "OSS folks", but by people who were trying the solve a political problem. The GPL meets the definition of the Open Source Definition, so GPL-licensed software is "Open Source(tm)". But Stallman objected to that usage, preferring his terminology "Free Software" on the grounds that it came first. So FOSS was a compromise to keep the FSF partisan happy. But to take this back to TUHS, sorry, no code which falls under AT&T License can be called "Open Source(tm)". If AT&T were still trying to sell Unix under its original terms including the AT&T Unpublished Trade Secret "all your student's minds belong to us" license, and tried to claim that Unix was "Open Source", the Open Source Initiative could sue AT&T for trademark infringement. If you must, you could try to claim that AT&T was "Source Available" --- which is a terminology I've seen some used. But I think your assumptions of how easily the AT&T License could be obtained, and how "anyone who wanted it could get it" may be looking at the past with rose-colored classes. Cheers, - Ted _______________________________________________ COFF mailing list COFF@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/coff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-14 17:49 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <alpine.BSF.firstname.lastname@example.org> [not found] ` <213a4c11-3ab2-4b4a-8d6b-b52105a19711@localhost> [not found] ` <CAE49LGn-gY9eikkwUgS+i3p=ZQV+gk_3BJ5V4_6B4HPbdyRuZw@mail.gmail.com> 2021-07-14 15:01 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-14 17:40 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message] 2021-07-14 17:50 ` Larry McVoy 2021-07-14 18:28 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-14 20:03 ` John Cowan [not found] <email@example.com> [not found] ` <CAKH6PiVCjo3YnTZUVYOCDeffQ6POVwGAQA1QMR9UinkfGn+AmQ@mail.gmail.com> 2021-07-15 6:33 ` Michael Kjörling 2021-07-15 20:44 ` Derek Fawcus 2021-07-15 15:07 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-15 19:33 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2021-07-15 20:30 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-16 1:58 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2021-07-16 2:14 ` George Michaelson 2021-07-16 18:02 ` Grant Taylor via COFF 2021-07-17 4:09 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2021-07-18 3:29 ` Grant Taylor via COFF 2021-07-18 3:42 ` David Arnold 2021-07-18 4:01 ` Grant Taylor via COFF 2021-07-19 13:41 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2021-07-19 14:50 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-19 17:38 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2021-07-19 19:33 ` John P. Linderman 2021-07-19 20:21 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-20 1:05 ` Grant Taylor via COFF 2021-07-19 20:08 ` Clem Cole 2021-07-20 0:55 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2021-07-18 6:44 ` Andy Kosela 2021-07-16 16:11 ` Jonathan Corbet 2021-07-15 23:02 ` joe mcguckin
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=YO8hpZ4VYln+QxNb@mit.edu \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [COFF] [TUHS] 386BSD released' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).