The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: grog@lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Subject: [TUHS] Microsoft, SCO, and a certain License
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:24:30 +1030	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040229075430.GD49757@wantadilla.lemis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200402292034.03414.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

On Sunday, 29 February 2004 at 20:34:03 +1300, Wesley Parish wrote:
> I know the SCO topic's been done to death, and all, but I was thinking about
> the Microsoft purchase of a Unix license (apparently) for their MS SFU
> (Windows Services For Unix) which contrary to the plain meaning of the name,
> is essentially a Unix (apparently OpenBSD, according to rumour) box on top of
> the Windows kernel and Win32 API.
>
> The question is, wouldn't that put Microsoft and the SCO Group in
> breach of the settlement between AT&T and Berkeley?

That settlement was superseded by Caldera's release of Ancient UNIX
two years ago.  See http://www.lemis.com/grog/UNIX/ and
http://www.lemis.com/grog/UNIX/ancient-source-all.pdf.

> If Win SFU _is_ OpenBSD, and Microsoft have bought a license to run
> it from the SCO Group of all people,

If it's OpenBSD, SCO can't give anybody a license to use it.

> isn't that in effect picking a fight with Theo de Raadt?

Why?  As long as they use it within the terms of the license, I can't
see that anybody can object.  As you can see from
http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html, about the only thing Microsoft
could do wrong there would be not to recognize openly the fact that
they got it from OpenBSD.

> This isn't definite, of course - some details I'm not sure of.

The most important detail is whether it was, in fact, derived from
OpenBSD.  This sounds very unlikely to me.  If it were the case, why
would they pay anything to SCO?

> But I think if this is so, we have some very interesting few years
> to look forward to.

Even then, there's little that people can complain about.

Greg
--
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20040229/4696caa0/attachment.sig>


  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-29  7:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-29  7:34 Wesley Parish
2004-02-29  7:54 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey [this message]
2004-02-29 16:25   ` Jon Snader
2004-02-29 23:54     ` Kurt Wall
2004-02-29 14:48 ` Paul Ward
2004-02-29 23:28   ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2004-03-01  0:46     ` Roger Willcocks
2004-03-01  0:53       ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2004-03-05 15:40 ` Larry J. Blunk
2004-03-05 15:50   ` Jim Capp
2004-03-05 21:36 [TUHS] Microsoft,SCO,and " zme
2004-03-05 23:38 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey

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=20040229075430.GD49757@wantadilla.lemis.com \
    --to=grog@lemis.com \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).