Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!kithrup!sef From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 21:12:16 GMT Message-ID: <1992Jul25.211216.2615@kithrup.COM> References: <1992Jul22.221515.23550@tfs.com> <1992Jul25.061414.3401@spcvxb.spc.edu> <102@ampr.ab.ca> Lines: 28 In article <102@ampr.ab.ca> lyndon@ampr.ab.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: >If their assertion is >that BSD/386 is a derivative work based on System V, why are they not >challenging this as a copyright violation? Copyright, trade secret, and patents. They just don't specify which one, nor do they specify *what* has been used without license. >As for the C vs. gcc argument, the feeling is that you cannot protect >a programming language per se, although you can prevent someone from >calling it 'C' if you properly protect the name 'C' as used in conjunction >with that programming language. There are movements, both here (US) and abroad, to allow the patenting or copyrighting of *languages*. Ashton-Tate would have dearly loved that ability. Go ask in gnu.misc.discuss for more details. >Witness what DOD has done to protect >the name Ada. The DOD has dropped the trademark status of Ada. Anyone can call anything 'Ada' now, I believe. -- Sean Eric Fagan | "My psychiatrist says I have a messiah sef@kithrup.COM | complex. But I forgive him." -----------------+ -- Jim Carrey Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.