27 Jun
2024
27 Jun
'24
8:10 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 12:44:53PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 12:00 PM Al Kossow
<aek(a)bitsavers.org> wrote:
The license changes were later announced at the first /usr/group meeting?
"Dennis Allison of Stanford, California is organizing a commercial UNIX
users group. The group is called /usr/group.
...
A meeting of the group was held on 17 October 1980 in Palo Alto."
;login:, vol 5, no 8, october 1980, p 9
https://archive.org/details/login_october-1980/page/9/mode/2up
A longer writeup in InfoWorld details Larry Isley's presentation of
volume based sub-licensing and mentions Onyx.
UNIX Users Unite, by Mokurai Cherlin
InfoWorld, vol 2, no 22, december 1980, pp 24-25
https://books.google.com/books?id=mD4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PT23
On 6/19/24 8:47 AM, Clem Cole wrote:
Not to my knowledge -- I probably know much/most of it as I lived it as
part of a couple of the negotiation teams.
The work on reviving a Plexus P20 prompted me to put up the history of Onyx
That's how I remember Otis Wilson explaining
it to us as
commercial licensees at a licensing meeting in the early 1980s.
We had finally completed the PWB 3.0 license to
replace the V7
commercial license (AT&T would rename this System III - but we knew it as
PWB
3.) during the negociations Summit had already
moved on to the next
version - PWB 4.0. IMO: Otis was not ready to start that process again.
Is the really early history of Unix licensing documented anywhere?
and Plexus at
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/plexus/history and a long time ago someone who
worked at Fortune
told me we can all thank Onyx in 1980 for working out the single machine
licensing with AT&T
Hmm, I'm not sure —but I don't think it is wholly clear—although Onyx
was
early and certainly would have been a part. They were not the only firm
that wanted redistribution rights.
Numerous vendors asked for the V7 redistribution license, with HP (Fred
Clegg), Microsoft (Bob Greenberg/Bill Gates), and Tektronix (me) being
three, I am aware. It is quite possible Onyx signed the original V7 license
first, but I know there was great unhappiness with the terms that AT&T
initially set up. When the folks from AT&T Patents and Licensing (Al Arms
at that point) talked to us individually, it was sort of "this is what we
are offering" - mind you, this all started >>pre-Judge Green<< and
the
concept of negotiation was somewhat one-sided as AT&T was not allowed in
the computer business.
There was also a bit of gnashing of teeth as PWB 2.0 was not on the price
list. At the time, Al's position was they could license the research, but
since AT&T was not in the commercial computer business, anything done for
the operation companies *(i.e.*, USG output) was not allowed to be
discussed.
The desire to redistribute UNIX (particularly on microprocessors) came up
at one of the earlier Asilomar Microprocessor workshops (which just held
its 50th in April, BTW). Prof Dennis Allison of Stanford was consulting
for most of us at the time and recognized we had a common problem. He set
up a meeting for the approx 10 firms, introduced us, and left us alone.
Thus began the meetings at Ricky's Hyatt (of which I was a part). This all
*eventually* begat the replacement license for what would be PWB 3.0.
I've mentioned those meetings a few times in this forum. As I said, it was
the only time I was ever in a small meeting with Gates. When we were
discussing the price for binary copies, starting at $5K and getting down to
$1K seemed reasonable for a $25K-$125K computer, which was most of our
price points. Microsoft wanted to pay $25/copy. He said to the rest of
us, "You guys don't get it. *The only thing that matters is volume*."