4 Mar
2017
4 Mar
'17
9:39 p.m.
From: Wesley Parish
I think the best thing for all would be the release of
the Unix SysV
source trees under a suitable open source license.
You may think that; I may think that, we _all_ may think that.
But in the legal world, that, and $2 (or whatever the going rate is these
days) will get you a cup of coffee.
Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually _doing_
something, any talk is ... just that.
Any volunteers to make something actually happen?
Noel
4 Mar
4 Mar
10:02 p.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
I've always wanted to buy into a source license then take in unpaid interns and give
them access to the code...
Although I guess that is pretty subversive?
I'll have to email Microfocus again ...
On March 4, 2017 11:39:27 PM GMT+08:00, Noel Chiappa <jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
From: Wesley
Parish
I think the best thing for all would be the
release of the Unix SysV
source trees under a suitable open source license.
You may think that; I may think that, we _all_ may think that.
But in the legal world, that, and $2 (or whatever the going rate is
these
days) will get you a cup of coffee.
Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually
_doing_
something, any talk is ... just that.
Any volunteers to make something actually happen?
Noel 
11:53 p.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote:
Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder
into actually
_doing_
something, any talk is ... just that.
Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get
complaints
and seem to get away with it. eg.
https://archive.org/details/ATTUNIXSystemVRelease4Version2
5 Mar
5 Mar
12:37 a.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
On Sat, 4 Mar 2017, Jacob Goense wrote:
On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote:
I don't know how they haven't been C&D'd out of existence by now.
-uso.
Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a
rights-holder into actually _doing_
something, any talk is ... just that.
Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get complaints
and seem to get away with it. eg.
<SNIP> 
12:38 a.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
Simple... OCILLA.
-----Original Message-----
From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Steve Nickolas
Sent: Saturday, March 4, 2017 1:37 PM
To: Jacob Goense
Cc: tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org; jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance?
On Sat, 4 Mar 2017, Jacob Goense wrote:
On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote:
I don't know how they haven't been C&D'd out of existence by now.
-uso.
Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a
rights-holder into actually
_doing_ something, any talk is ... just that.
Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get
complaints and seem to get away with it. eg.
<SNIP> 
2:39 a.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
They have a DMCA archival exemption.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 4, 2017, at 09:53, Jacob Goense
<dugo(a)xs4all.nl> wrote:
On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu
wrote:
Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually _doing_
something, any talk is ... just that.
Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get complaints
and seem to get away with it. eg.
https://archive.org/details/ATTUNIXSystemVRelease4Version2 
11:54 p.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) wrote:
From: Wesley
Parish
> I think the best thing for all would be the release of the Unix SysV
> source trees under a suitable open source license. Any volunteers to make something actually happen?
As mentioned before, Sun in theory had the right, but this did not include the
networking code and code that includes code from Xenix (e.g. ls.c).
Now that Oracle bought Sun, there is few chance even for that because Oracle is
not known to be OSS friendly.
The other rights owner was SCO....
SCO has been OSS friendly. SCO created the historical UNIX license and a bit
later, I was able to convince SCO to make SCCS OpenSource and got a "final"
OK in April 2001. But in May 2001, SCO was sold to Caldera Linux and the new
owner was not OSS friendly and canceled the agreement.
This caused a delay for making SCCS OpenSource, as I now had to convince Sun
and succeeded in December 2006.
Now that a judge ignored the contract between Novell and SCO and followed the
oral claims from a Novell employee, it seems that somebody would need to
convince Novell. I doubt that this will have a chance to work.
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
joerg.schilling(a)fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/
6 Mar
6 Mar
12:24 a.m.
New subject: Source code abundance?
'Now that a judge ignored the contract between Novell and SCO and followed the
oral claims from a Novell employee, it seems that somebody would need to convince Novell.
I doubt that this will have a chance to work.'sounds very plausible to me.
2848
days inactive
2849
days old
8 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Cory Smelosky -
Jacob Goense -
Jason Stevens -
jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu -
Mutiny -
Ron Natalie -
schily＠schily.net -
Steve Nickolas