Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!hp9000.csc.cuhk.hk!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!caen!destroyer!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!JUTS!macaw!haw30
From: haw30@macaw.ccc.amdahl.com (Henry A Worth)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Message-ID: <b3tK02X.1cIi01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
Date: 4 Aug 92 15:53:02 GMT
References: <1992Jul21.104627.3353@mel.dit.csiro.au> <1992Jul21.131433.16450@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> <1992Jul30.173606.28357@kas.helios.mn.org> <12369.9207311742@thor.cf.ac.uk>
Sender: netnews@ccc.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 24
In article <12369.9207311742@thor.cf.ac.uk> spedpr@thor.cf.ac.uk (Paul Richards) writes:
>
> As a matter of interest, since this case is taking place in the US, what
> effect will it have on us non-US users. For instance, I don't see how
> they could possibly get back copies of NET-2 from non-US sites or for
> that matter, recall copies of BSDI from outside the US. Since I know
> nothing about law, let alone international law, I could be completely
> and utterly wrong of course.
Don't be so sure, some treaties might apply but they have little
authority under law (what law, there is no international law except as the
parties involved agree to observe or have the might to dictate) and are
often ignored when convenient (the proverbial "honored in the breach"). But,
even if there are no relevant treaties, or someone decides they can afford to
ignore the treaty, the U.S. Supreme Court recently recently ruled that
nothing in the U.S Constitution or law prevents federal law enforcement
agencies from enforcing U.S. law anywhere in the world. So, if USL convinces
the U.S. government that it is in the interests of the U.S. to have those
copies returned... you might just be visited in the middle of the night. :-)
--
Henry Worth
No, I don't speak for Amdahl... I'm not even sure I speak for myself.