To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: [TUHS] Re: Current Ownership of 3B/WECo Computer IPs
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2023 21:35:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2349 bytes --]
My understanding is all the WE IP was retained through the
Alcatel-Lucent mergers and is now owned by Nokia. That would include
all the 3Bx systems and WE32k.
On 2023-09-10 21:11, segaloco via TUHS wrote:
> Hello folks, I'm here today with a question that sprung off of some
> 3B20 research.
> When 1984 happened and ATTIS rose from the ashes of former Bell System
> computing efforts, presumably ATTIS received all IP rights from Western
> Electric for 3B processors, WE32000, and so on, and continued to sell
> related products through to the 3B2 line. Is this the case, is ATTIS
> the formal recipient of both computing software *and* hardware IPs
> after the breakup?
> Given that, plus subsequent market flow, "old AT&T" scooped up and
> paraded around in effigy by SBC, other old Bell stuff cannibalized by
> other RBOCs, spinoffs of stuff to Novell, then Caldera/SCO on the other
> side...who all wound up with the hardware IPs? The story as it
> "concludes" concerning UNIX is of course tied up in all the subsequent
> lawsuits, what with Novell and Caldera conflicts on ownership, transfer
> to the Open Group, so on and so forth, and SCO and progeny wind up with
> the Sys V "trunk."
> Is there a clear, current owner of these WECo hardware IPs, or have
> those waters grown even murkier than those of UNIX in the times after
> AT&T proper?
> Thanks everyone!
> - Matt G.
> P.S. As an aside (even though it's the more directly UNIX thing...) is
> anything after SVR4 developments that would've involved the same folks
> as were working up to that point in the USL group? Or did the transfer
> of System V to Novell also involve their own in house folks starting to
> take it over, then over to SCO, is there anything post SVR4 (4.2, 5,
> UnixWare stuff) that would even remotely be considered the logical next
> step by the same folks that engineered SVR4, or was it basically just
> another face in the crowd of "UNIX <xyz>" when USL wasn't involved
> anymore? Probably not the first time this has been asked either so to a
> finer point I'm basically fishing for whether anything post the initial
> SVR4 releases in the early 90s is generally considered "pure" in any
> way or if the Bell streams pretty much terminate with Research V10 and
> SVR4, (and IX) at the turn of the 90s.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3520 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-11 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-11 1:11 [TUHS] " segaloco via TUHS
2023-09-11 1:35 ` alan [this message]
2023-09-11 2:02 ` [TUHS] " alan
2023-09-11 3:17 ` Kevin Bowling
2023-09-11 1:43 ` Clem Cole
2023-09-11 2:57 ` segaloco via TUHS
2023-09-11 3:37 ` Clem Cole
2023-09-11 15:34 ` Paul Winalski
2023-09-11 17:46 ` [TUHS] nassau smelting was " Mark Seiden
2023-09-11 19:58 ` [TUHS] " Douglas McIlroy
[not found] ` <F227DB6D-F1D5-45CD-9F7Afirstname.lastname@example.org>
2023-09-11 21:06 ` Douglas McIlroy
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).