Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!hp9000.csc.cuhk.hk!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!Shiva.COM!world!bzs
From: bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: UNIGRAM's article on the USL-BSDI suit
Message-ID: <BZS.92Aug1172816@ussr.std.com>
Date: 1 Aug 92 22:28:16 GMT
References: <1992Aug1.042344.23428@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <l7k5fqINNgc9@neuro.usc.edu>
<l7k6maINNgeg@neuro.usc.edu> <l7k72rINNgfn@neuro.usc.edu>
<leb.712651912@Hypatia>
Sender: usenet@world.std.com (Mr USENET himself)
Organization: The World
Lines: 97
In-Reply-To: leb@Hypatia.gsfc.nasa.gov's message of Sat, 1 Aug 1992 06:51:52 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: ussr.std.com
Re: UCB's ability to sustain a legal fight.
It is not just UCB, it's essentially all Universities who are being
challenged and they know it.
USL winning this case would have far-reaching implications pertaining
to the ownership of intellectual property, and not just in Computer
Science, but biotechnology, physics, chemistry and other fields where
close industry associations exist.
Merely fighting off the inevitable lawsuits precipitated by a
judgement favorable to AT&T/USL could cost Universities billions over
the next few years, not to mention loss of control of billions of
dollars of intellectual property.
There are several large, research-oriented Universities (Harvard,
Stanford and MIT come right to mind) who are very capable of pursuing
their interests and, no doubt, quite interested in not seeing a
ruinous decision/precedent obtained. Last I heard Harvard had about
$20 billion in its endowments (more or less cash in the bank), and a
fairly capable law school and other specialists in public affairs
(ahem.)
The fastest and most economical way to resolve this:
Several major research universities form a consortium, each chips in a
few dozen millions and just buys USL.
Their investment could be recouped and made profitable by legitimate
licensing and technology interests, and their intellectual property
ranging from X-Windows to NET-2 etc would be protected to the extent
that any adverse precedent could be used in the future to make claims
against those properties.
If those same universities can sink similar amounts of monies into
bio-technology companies (Genentech, Seragen, etc) and other ventures
of much higher risk (after all Unix seems fairly well established) I
think they would do well to seriously consider this proposal.
--------------------
Post Script:
It is pathetic to watch AT&T/USL, after losing billions of dollars
unsuccessfully trying to turn Unix into a business for themselves
while just about everyone else involved with Unix manages to build
successful companies, stoop to this sort of legal prevarication.
No one makes money in these ugly fights other than the attorneys. You
would think AT&T and USL would know better. These sorts of strategic
litigation have already been well studied in the law journals and are
known to be of questionable value (other than to the attorneys hired.)
Either a product sells and is attractive to the market, or it is not.
No judge and no jury can make a product profitable so long as
legitimate competition exists.
AT&T has long had serious problems with the quality of Unix products
they have shipped and most have met with only lukewarm success in the
market.
In about one year IBM built a bigger and more profitable Unix market
than AT&T/USL has in a decade of trying. In the past few years Sun
Microsystems* has grown from a few hundred million dollars in revenue
to several billions, all Unix. Similar stories abound for HP, SCO,
Interactive, and many layered applications vendors.
None of these companies has sought their markets in the courts. They
sought their markets in the marketplace, which is the only place
markets can be found.
I have no doubt that AT&T/USL are tired and frustrated after losing
billions of dollars trying to develop a Unix product acceptable to the
marketplace.
I have no doubt that this latest lawsuit is a desparate product of
that frustration, perhaps a way for Roel Piper (CEO, USL) to put the
blame on something other than the obvious: Failing to produce a
product attractive to the marketplace.
AT&T/USL should stop this pathetic enrichment of blood-thirsty
attorneys and scapegoating of their own inadequacies, sit down at a
table with the business interests involved, come to some equitable and
peaceful solution, and get on with business.
You may be able to fool the judgement of the courts, but you cannot
fool the judgement of a free and open marketplace.
* Sun Microsystems is a shareholder in USL.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD