Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 10:51:33 -0700 From: Johnson David <DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> To: Supote Leelasupphakorn <pjn0211@yahoo.com>, freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ask about BSD's history. Message-ID: <200307211051.33797.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <20030721041519.4165.qmail@web40603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030721041519.4165.qmail@web40603.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 20 July 2003 09:15 pm, Supote Leelasupphakorn wrote: > 1. What is the result of lawsuit between BSDi (maybe > include UC Berkeley) and USL in the early of 1970s ? > 2. The article I've read talk about six files. > What's > the matter ? > 3. and anything else you would like to tell anyone. If my memory is correct: For a few years, BSD had been removing SysV code and replacing it with their own. The goal was a 100% free BSD. But it wasn't fast enough, and USL sued BSDI for copyright infringement. The impetus for this seems to have been a trademake violation instead, since BSDI was calling itself a "UNIX". Very shortly afterwards, UC countersued USL. It seems that AT&T had been incorporating BSD code into SysV. The lawsuits were eventually settled. Most of the terms of the settlement are still sealed by the court, but we do know some of them. There were six source code files in the BSD code base that were ordered to be removed. Without these six files, the distribution was called "BSD Lite". There were undoubtedly other instances of SysV code in BSD, but the court said that once only those six files were removed, the BSD code base would be legally "unencumbered". Another provision was that BSDs could not call themselves "UNIX". Finally, USL could continue to use BSD code, but they would have to provide appropriate attribution. FreeBSD 1.0 was still "encumbered" by SysV code, but FreeBSD 2.0 was clean and unencumbered. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200307211051.33797.DavidJohnson>