Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,alt.suit.att-bsdi
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sdl!plts!tal
From: tal@plts.uucp (Tom Limoncelli)
Subject: UNIGRAM's article on the USL-BSDI suit
Message-ID: <1992Aug1.020513.14170@plts.uucp>
Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd
Organization: Tom's Box of Ahedonia
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1992 02:05:13 GMT
Lines: 179
I'm posting this without any comments. I just thought it might be good
fodder (though I'm not sure for which side).
(It does contain some new news.)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
COPIED WITH PERMISSION OF UNIGRAM X COPYRIGHT (C) UNIGRAM PRODUCTS LTD.
------------------------------------------------------
London, August 3-7, 1992
Issue 396
+ NOW UNIX SYSTEM LABS TURNS THE HEAT
ON UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA OVER BERKELEY CODE
In an unprecedented action against one of its own educational
licencees, Unix System Laboratories has filed suit in the US
federal courts against the University of California, Berkeley,
charging the prestigious institution with breach of contract,
copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets and
Lanham Trademark Act violations. The move makes UC Berkeley a
party to USL's existing suit against software start-up Berkeley
Software Design Inc (UX Nos 392, 394) for unfair competition,
deceptive trade practices and false advertising. USL has now
amended that suit against BSDI to include additional charges of
copyright infringement, trade secret violations and inducing
breach of contract.
Harassment
BSDI's response to the amended suit, which was served last
Thursday, was to declare it "totally without merit" and "another
step in [USL's] harassment campaign." BSDI, an alleged spin-off
of UC Berkeley's Computer Sciences Research Group, author of the
famous Berkeley code, is attempting to commercialise a 386
operating system called BSD/386 based on the university's Network
Release 2. Berkeley and BSDI claim NET2 is AT&T code-free and
owes no licensing fees to USL. USL says it "knows for a fact"
NET2 contains proprietary AT&T code. USL also says UC Berkeley
rebuffed every proposal it put forward over the last few months
to resolve the dispute without recourse to litigation. According
to USL, the school effectively rejected a proposal for a full
comparison of Berkeley versus USL code by unbiased third parties
by demanding that the evaluation be limited only to USL-specified
snapshots and by selecting as arbiters for its side members of
the Computer Systems Research Group whose credentials, USL
claims, were already tainted. CSRG, in what appears to be a form
letter over the signature of CSRG team member Marshall Kirk
McKusick, made written representations to BSDI on April 30, 1991
that Berkeley software "may be freely redistributed...." and
"requires no previous licence, either from AT&T or The Regents of
the University of California." The university reportedly picked
McKusick as one of its evaluators.
Public opinion
Had that proposal been acted on, McKusick, CSRG senior programmer
and past president of Usenix, would have found himself in another
conflict of interests since he is believed to be a secret a
director of BSDI. BSDI, which the USL suit suggests is in
collusion with CSRG, declines to publicly identify any of its
founders or investors declaring such information "proprietary" on
the basis that BSDI is a closely held company. No names appear on
BSDI's papers of incorporation except the company's nominal
president Rick Adams who was described to Unigram last week by
Donnalyn Frey, BSDI's spokesman, as merely a figurehead, soon to
be replaced when BSDI completes its current search for a chief
executive. Adams, she said, is actually the president of UUNet
Technologies, a long-established company currently distributing
BSD/386. Donnalyn, well-known as Usenix's erstwhile spokesman,
should know since she is in fact Mrs Rick Adams. Besides
McKusick, there are other ties between CSRG and BSDI. According
to an April filing with the Virginia Commission on Corporations,
where BSDI is headquartered, CSRG senior programmer Keith Bostic
and former CSRG mainstay Mike Karels, the acknowledged architect
of the university's 4.3 BSD release, are also directors of BSDI.
BSDI describes Karels simply as an employee, claiming he joined
the company after BSD/386 was established. Another director is
Don Seeley, an employee of UUNet Technologies, the supplier of
UUNet. Clearly USL will argue that CSRG staff gave themselves
permission to commercialise the system and will doubtless note a
violation of the university's established code of ethics which
requires university personnel with a financial interest in a
university decision to disqualify themselves. BSDI, meanwhile, is
attempting to try the case in the court of public opinion. The
week before last it put the full text of the initial complaint
(but not the expanded suit) on UUNet ostensibly because so many
were asking to see the exact wording. More details on page four.
+ 100,000 USERS HAVE YET ANOTHER BERKELEY VARIANT - 386BSD...
by Maureen O'Gara
Besides Berkeley Software Design Inc's BSD/386 operating system,
there is another body of 386 code making the rounds. That code
got started in conjunction with the same University of California
lab that BSDI's did and traces its roots first to 4.3BSD Tahoe
and ultimately to the same NET2 subset source. This code is
confusingly named 386BSD after the original 386BSD project kicked
off in the university's Computer Systems Research Group in 1989.
The man who says he named both pieces of software is former
386BSD project leader and principal developer of BSD 2.8 and 2.9,
Bill Jolitz. Jolitz reportedly mortgaged his house to start the
initial 386BSD project and subsequently finished it in his own
time. The code and its rationale were published over the course
of a year in Dr Dobb's Journal beginning in January of 1991. It
was also picked up by Dr Dobbs' sister publication Unix Magazin
in Germany. The full code has been available on InterNet for the
last two months and was to go on CompuServe last week, according
to Dr Dobbs' editor Jonathan Erickson. He estimates that 386BSD
is currently in the hands of 100,000 people. Jolitz, interviewed
by Unigram.X last week, says that his 386BSD, at least in its
initial versions, was encumbered. He also says that 386BSD is the
basis of BSDI's BSD/386 which he worked on in 1991 at CSRG
initially under the financial sponsorship of UUNet Technologies.
Last summer his cheques started coming from BSDI. He claims he
was never officially hired by BSDI and signed no employment
contract with the firm, which he believes is the brainchild of
UUNet chief Rick Adams and former CSRG staffer Mike Karels who
was best man at Jolitz's wedding. However, Jolitz was apparently
crucial to the project since none of BSDI's principals, alias
CSRG's staffers, knew much about 386 Berkeley and couldn't
maintain it. 386BSD was originally intended to be "a university
curiosity," Jolitz said, a non-commercial, non-industrial
strength way for students, facility and researchers to have
access to Berkeley code on inexpensive machines. Increasingly
through last year it became apparent that what CSRG wanted was
"basically the same thing as BSDI:" an unencumbered commercial
system. Ultimately, he says, he opposed it since it would mean
terminating the 386BSD project, an action CSRG has taken, as well
as having him renege on a published promise to produce freely
accessible 386 code. He broke with BSDI in November, he says, but
not before Usenix mysteriously refused to allow him to present a
paper on his 386 work and BSDI offered to cut him in - in return
for the title to his house. The first tack he regards as a way
for CSRG/BSDI to limit competition. The second tactic he regards
as an attempt to keep him in line. He says he attempted to bring
what was happening to the attention of university authorities
such as CSRG's faculty overseer Susan Graham and its Office of
Technology Licensing but was sluffed off. He claims the
university is guilty of "incompetent stewardship." He
subsequently received letters from CSRG and university counsel
claiming that all the work he had contributed to Berkeley since
NET2 was "University proprietary," a phrase he had never heard
before. In November he was asked to destroy all his own work and
anything in his possession having to do with Berkeley or 386. He
says he complied and rewrote the current 386BSD Release 0.0 from
scratch. He says he receives no money from BSDI for his code
though he alleges BSDI has told its customers that he does.
Jolitz does not believe NET2 is encumbered.
+ ...AS BSDI PUTS THE WORD ON THE NET
The week before last, BSDI put the full text of Unix System Labs'
initial complaint (but not the expanded suit) on UUNet,
ostensibly because so many people were asking to see the exact
wording - see front page. As might be expected, the move has
stirred up a hornet's nest of academic fear and loathing against
USL and has created a cadre of naive tech weinees ready to form a
lynch mob. For all their thousands of lines of protests, however,
no one has flat out denied USL's intellectual property rights.
USL's suit asks the courts to oblige UC Berkeley to abide by its
license from USL. It also wants the school to recall all copies
of NET2. USL is seeking an unstipulated amount of actual and
compensatory damages from UC Berkeley as well as legal fees. It
wants the same from BSDI plus punitive damages. BSDI is
reportedly getting set to move from a beta to a gamma version of
BSD/386 either this week or next. It says it has distributed over
300 copies of the beta system to an assortment of users including
hackers, old DOS buffs and big brand name computer makers. BSDI
is also getting ready to expand its distributor base.
--
Tom Limoncelli goshicanneverthinkofwhattoputinmydotsignaturemaybeifijustwrite
-- tal@plts.uucp lotsoftextnobodywillnoticethatiamnotreallysayinganythinggee
-- uunet!sdl!plts!tal thatissortofusenetinamicrocosmisntitpeopletalkingonand
-- tal@warren.mentorg.com onandnotreallysayinganythingwowhowutterlyironicofme