[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[Norman Wilson]

Larry J. Blunk:

     Apologies if this has been answered before, but I noticed
  that there are AT&T copyright notices in the kernel sources
  for Unix Edition 5, but they were removed in Edition 6.
  [...] I noticed that USL registered Editions 5, 6, 7 and 32V in
  1992.  I would assume that Editions 4 and earlier are free
  and clear [...]
  As I understand it, Editions 7 and 32V could have had copyright
  protection without registration since they were released after
  1978.  However, because they lacked copyright notices when
  released, they may very well be considered public domain.  It was
  not until 1989 that the requirement for including
  copyright notices was dropped.

========

Notwithstanding other comments about the history, for practical purposes
none of this matters for Seventh Edition and 32V and anything earlier,
because Caldera (as it then was) open-licensed them in January 2002;
see http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf.  To be precise,
that license covers

   32-bit 32V UNIX
   16 bit UNIX Versions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

with specific exclusion of System III and System V and successors.

That is why source code for the Seventh Edition system (for example)
is openly accessibly on the TUHS web server.

Among those whose dog work produced first a hobbyist-specific per-person
license, then the current BSD-like license, was Warren Toomey, who manages
that web server and this mailing list.  I don't think it will give him
a swollen head (or a wooden leg) to thank him now and then, and I do so here.

Long-time readers know all that, but those who have joined us recently
might not.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[Warren Toomey]

On Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 03:17:57AM -0500, Norman Wilson wrote:
>>   As I understand it, Editions 7 and 32V could have had copyright
>>   protection without registration since they were released after
>>   1978.  However, because they lacked copyright notices when
>>   released, they may very well be considered public domain....
> 
> Notwithstanding other comments about the history, for practical purposes
> none of this matters for Seventh Edition and 32V and anything earlier,
> because Caldera (as it then was) open-licensed them in January 2002;
> see http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf.

About 2 years ago, Dennis Ritchie sent me a long e-mail explaining why
certain releases of UNIX, and 32V in particular, did not have any
copyright notices. When I get back from holidays, I'll see if Dennis
will let me forward the information here.
 
> Among those whose work produced ... the current BSD-like license,
> was Warren Toomey, who manages that web server and this mailing list.
> I don't think it will give him a swollen head (or a wooden leg) to
> thank him now and then, and I do so here.

It does make me go Owwww sometimes, especially with this SCO thing.

Have a good and safe Christmas, all.

	Warren

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <20031224060846.GA40195 at minnie.tuhs.org>
            Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> writes:
: So technically, yes someone owns the copyright on these files, but
: they permit the content of the files to be placed in other programs
: or kernels.

So long as the copyright notices, etc, are maintained...  An important
detail, but one which is worth remembering.  In the early days of
linux, there was much code borrowing from BSD w/o attribution (eg, the
copyright notices were filed off).  While most of these issues have
been corrected, it is important to note that proper forms must be
followed in order for the grant of license to be valid.

Warner

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[Warren Toomey]

On Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 01:05:36AM -0500, Larry J. Blunk wrote:
>  In case you haven't guessed, I'm thinking about the various include
> files in the Linux kernel that SCO has claimed infringes on their
> copyrights.  Many of the defines and comments seem to have originated
> in Unix Edition 7 and earlier. For example,
> 
> errno.h - http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/Nsys/sys/nsys/user.h.html
>  and  http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V5/usr/source/s4/errlst.c.html

which are all under a BSD license provided by Caldera, see
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf

So technically, yes someone owns the copyright on these files, but
they permit the content of the files to be placed in other programs
or kernels.

	Warren

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[Larry J. Blunk]

On 12/24/03 00:31:27, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> I think that one thing complicating the state of this code is that  
> the
> Uruguay Treaty restored many copyrights to many copyright holders who
> had failed to put a notice in their works.  However, derivitive works
> done while in the public domain would still belong to the folks that
> did them, if I read things correctly.
> 
> 
>

  I found a document addressing the Uruguay Treaty at
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38b.pdf.   It seems it only
applies to certain foreign works (non-US) that were previously
considered public domain in the US.

  In case you haven't guessed, I'm thinking about the various include
files in the Linux kernel that SCO has claimed infringes on their
copyrights.  Many of the defines and comments seem to have originated
in Unix Edition 7 and earlier. For example,

errno.h - http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/Nsys/sys/nsys/user.h.html
  and  http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V5/usr/source/s4/errlst.c.html

signal.h - http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/Nsys/sys/nsys/param.h.html

ioctl.h
ioctls.h -http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/sys/h/tty.h.html

ctype.h - http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/include/ctype.h.html

stat.h - http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/include/sys/stat.h.html

 

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[M. Warner Losh]

I think that one thing complicating the state of this code is that the
Uruguay Treaty restored many copyrights to many copyright holders who
had failed to put a notice in their works.  However, derivitive works
done while in the public domain would still belong to the folks that
did them, if I read things correctly.

Warner

[TUHS] Copyright notices in Edition 5, removed in Edition 6

[Larry J. Blunk]

   Apologies if this has been answered before, but I noticed
that there are AT&T copyright notices in the kernel sources
for Unix Edition 5, but they were removed in Edition 6.  You can
still see the comment blocks for the notices in Edition 6, but
the notices themselves have been removed.  Does anyone have the
history on this?

  I noticed that USL registered Editions 5, 6, 7 and 32V in
1992.  I would assume that Editions 4 and earlier are free
and clear because, prior to 1978, registration was a requirement
for protection.   Further, since USL waited longer than 5 years
to register the copyrights for 5, 6, 7 and 32V, these may be
free and clear as well.

  As I understand it, Editions 7 and 32V could have had copyright
protection without registration since they were released after
1978.  However, because they lacked copyright notices when
released, they may very well be considered public domain.  It was
not until 1989 that the requirement for including
copyright notices was dropped.