Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- events:free_licenses [2016/01/04 14:29] – [Drafting the License Terms] wkt
+++ events:free_licenses [2022/08/15 02:39] – old revision restored (2016/01/04 14:05) 149.57.16.137
@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 The minutiae of the dialogue on the license terms (before the first draft) between myself and SCO can be found in these e-mails:
-  * [[http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Emails/dionj_wkt.html#9708271056.aa18110@tahoe.pdev.sco.com|installation and binary only for non licensees, who does the distribution of code?]]
+  * Unordered List Item [[http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Emails/dionj_wkt.html#9708271056.aa18110@tahoe.pdev.sco.com|installation and binary only for non licensees, who does the distribution of code?]]
   * [[http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Emails/dionj_wkt.html#199708272353.JAA00997@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au|quibbles on wording, authentication license holders]]
   * [[http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Emails/dionj_wkt.html#199708310504.WAA01033@moe.2bsd.com|what systems would be licensed?]] and[[http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Emails/dionj_wkt.html#199708310412.OAA04965@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au|followup]]
@@ Line 144: / Line 144: @@
 Wow! We had gone from no licenses to binary-only licenses, to paid then free licenses, and now BSD-style licenses. I could finally make the [[http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/|Unix Archive]] available by anonymous FTP and through the web.
-===== Postscript: Uncertainty =====
-The history from this point turns somewhat sour, as Caldera became the SCO Group (TSG, aka "New SCO") and began [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_Group,_Inc._v._International_Business_Machines_Corp.|litigating against IBM]] over copyright violations.
-Near the end of this saga, Judge Kimball, who presided over the SCO v. Novell case, ruled that Novell, not the SCO Group, is the rightful owner of the copyrights covering the Unix operating system. (//ibid.//)
-As Novell did not issue any of the above licenses, it may mean that they are technically invalid: old SCO, Caldera and new SCO only had the right to sub-license the Unix source code. This leaves the legal status of these licenses in a very grey area.
-However, given that the Unix Archive has now been available anonymously for well over a decade, it would be absolutely impossible to put the early Unix source code back into the genie's bottle.
 //(incomplete, more to come!)//