From owner-freebsd-scsi  Sun Sep 14 15:05:37 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-scsi>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA03743
          for freebsd-scsi-outgoing; Sun, 14 Sep 1997 15:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usr09.primenet.com (tlambert@usr09.primenet.com [206.165.6.209])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03723;
          Sun, 14 Sep 1997 15:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from tlambert@localhost)
	by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA24060;
	Sun, 14 Sep 1997 15:05:21 -0700 (MST)
From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Message-Id: <199709142205.PAA24060@usr09.primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Patches on senderp-ppp.i-connect.net
To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 22:05:20 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, Shimon@i-connect.net,
        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199709141821.MAA19937@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Sep 14, 97 12:21:33 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > a) It is not ``proprietary'' unless you take legal and proper actions
> >    to keep it as such.  In most cases you have done just the opposite,
> >    you've given pointers to it in a public forum.
> 
> Correct.

Or it might be seen as "due dilligence"...

> > b) The action of making it avaliable to anyone other than yourself
> >    is `publication'', thierfor the code is not ``unpublished''.
> 
> Then AT&T/USL/Novell/SCO code isn't publication either, since they
> contain the same wording.  I'd tend to be believe that the above isn't
> true.

You're right.  Unpublished code can remain unpublished, however widely
distributed, so long as it is only distributed to a "select group".

Without controls on who can FTP the code, there is no group selection
enforced.  This would fail to meet the criteria for distribution of
unpublished sources, I'm afraid.  Which means that due dilligence isn't
met either.

> 
> > c) Your ftp server welcome message desen't even head any warnings
> >    what so ever.
> 
> I don't think it matters, since many ftp servers that distribute
> copyrighted software don't have welcome messages.  Welcome messages
> aren't even standard on stock ftp server.
> 
> But, the first clause alone is enough to make things 'interesting.

Yup.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.