1994 BSD/Unix Settlement Released On Groklaw 336
davidwr writes "Groklaw has the newly-released-previously-secret 1994 Berkeley/UNIX Systems Laboratories settlement which gave rise to BSD4.4(Lite) (as pdf and text with commentary). This may have an impact on the SCO vs. Linux war."
Great to read (Score:2, Interesting)
Right, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Big Difference (Score:5, Interesting)
That's not the difference (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux Popularity a Result of BSD/Unix Suit? (Score:5, Interesting)
For those of us accustomed to Unix and looking to run it on our desktops in the early 1990s, we found that there were very few options at the time. The popular choice was BSD, but those of us who read Boardwatch and kept up with the choice few Usenet groups knew only that there was some kind of a BSD lawsuit that made it bad to use. The details were fuzzy, but we thought that BSD would be a dead end.
Instead, we used Linux. It was much less popular, and way underpowered (compared to BSD), but it was unencumbered by lawsuits and would let us run all of those
I'll wager that, if not for the FUD that came of this lawsuit, BSD would be the OS of choice for geeks today. Instead, Linux is far more popular -- I continue to use it a decade later, with the vague guilt that I would be cooler if I were running BSD. I wonder to what degree the SCO FUD is similarly affecting the choice of Linux today?
-Waldo Jaquith
also no: look at the family tree (Score:5, Interesting)
One wonders (Score:5, Interesting)
One wonders if Sun Microsystems might be hoping that the SCO suit will drive people from Linux to Solaris the same way that the USL suit drove people from BSD to Linux.
Re:Linux Popularity a Result of BSD/Unix Suit? (Score:2, Interesting)
Basically, the BSD case was settled because USL was sold to Novell and Ray Noorda was feeling charitable. At that time BSD4.4 was considered to be ridiclously obsolete ("dying") when compared to SVR4 UnixWare.
The real tragedy in all this is that that Novell didn't sell you a $300 UNIX for your PC and instead basically buried UnixWare.
FUD in the Literal Sense (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm sure that's true, but I use the term "FUD" not in the pejorative sense, but instead in the literal one: there was fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the wisdom of using BSD, at least in the mind of this then-15-year-old.
-Waldo Jaquith
Re:War? (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps it's because neither of them are 'conventional' wars, and we're not used to winning wars with anything other than bombs.
Perhaps I Was Unclear (Score:5, Interesting)
More people were using BSD because Linux barely existed. The Linux kernel hadn't even gone 1.0. It was under 1MB. It wasn't a matter of the lawsuit -- it was that Linux was unknown.
Moreover, you do not consider the very real philosophical difference between the BSD and GNU people.
What you mean is that I did not (past tense) consider the philosophical differences. And you're right -- I was totally uninterested. We didn't have "open source" -- the phrase didn't exist. We had free software. Both BSD and Linux were free. Both had source to edit. What teenager cared about some contract?
I'll wager that many of your peers made the choice based on the philisophical grounds.
My older friends surely chose based on philosophical grounds -- those old enough to be in any way interested in IP and related freedoms. I was writing for 2600 and decompiling and modifying MS-DOS for fun -- wasn't no contract going to stop me from doing whatever I wanted with an OS, or so I figured.
But you were the man on the spot, you tell me, was it impending abuse and the desire to not aid the abusers as obvious then as it is now?
I'm afraid that I'm not sure that I understand your question. But perhaps it would answer your question to restate my premise: we had no idea what the deal was with the lawsuit. Abuse schmabuse -- we figured that BSD might go away (whatever that would constitute), so why bet on a losing horse?
-Waldo Jaquith
Apple & OS X (Score:3, Interesting)
PJ quit the OSRM (Score:4, Interesting)
SCO has been having a road show in the UK. As it happens, a Groklaw reader attended, and this individual reported to me that one of the speakers, in a talk about intellectual property risks in Linux and how you shouldn't use it in business as a result, mentioned me by name, and twisted my relationship with OSRM to say that it proved that I believe there are substantial IP risks in Linux.
That is nonsense, of course. It actually means the opposite, if anything. I was never involved in the insurance side of OSRM anyway. But I take it seriously that they are using my work relationship for FUD purposes. There was also the Ballmer FUD to factor in. I have thought about it carefully for a couple of days and brainstormed some. There is a scripture that says the heart is desperate, meaning it wants what it wants and tries to find a way to justify what it wants, and I'm only human. No one likes to separate themselves from an income stream if they don't have to. I tried to justify to myself maintaining the status quo. The FUD is unfair, but it doesn't matter. FUD is always unfair. One must simply deal with it. In analyzing my choices, I kept coming back to the same thing. If my working for OSRM is doing harm by creating FUD possibilities, I need to remove that issue. Money is nice, but integrity is everything.
So, I have resigned.
OSRM were extremely gracious about it. Down the road, when there's nothing left of SCO but an old blues song, perhaps we'll be able to work together again. But for now, I decided to try to find other work.
I have spoken with ibiblio about the UNIX/Linux Ownership History Timeline, and they have kindly agreed to host it. I love ibiblio.
Re:War? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, there is a good example of this in the American war For independence - Gen. Green, an American leader in the fight for the South,lost every battle he fought, and yet he won the South. He did this by forcing the British to chase his forces deep inland, away from the coastal areas where the British troops were easily restocked or supplies by the Britist Navy. This forced the British forces to turn to the American populace for supplies, which the British often took by force. the British actions turned the majority of Southerners against the British cause, when at the start of their campaign, only a few Americans were dead set against the British.
Re:pay the cost to be the boss (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:USofA lost both. (Score:4, Interesting)
No, we (they?) haven't lost this one. This isn't a war that you just "stop fighting" when you've "won". The drugs will keep fighting to exist, so society has to keep fighting the war forever if society chooses not to have drugs everywhere.
I used to not grok the war on drugs. I've done a few "light" drugs myself and never understood what the big deal was. Last April I thought I was getting a great deal on a house until I found out why the seller had priced it $30K below market - the house next door was infested with dealers and users. Guys doing crazy uppers - out shouting at each other every night at the top of their lungs until 4AM, going "MOTHERFUCKER MOTHERFUCKING UP IN MY SHIT SO I CHOKED THE BITCH OUT" and stupid nonsenese so loud it would shake my (closed, heavy 2-pane) windows. Then there were the fights. Then there were were ODs. That's when I learned real quick why we have a war on drugs. BTW this is in Campbell, CA - not the most expensive homes in the bay area, but certainly not the ghetto!
For months I talked to other neighbors who were all too afriad to give their names when the called the police - they were afraid they'd get shot, or their houses burned down if they complained. I'd call the cops but they always said they couldn't go in on a noise complaint, no matter how many.
So I tracked down the local drug enforcement czar, and he told me what to do. Keep a log, write down license plates, call the cops every time it gets out of hand. So I did, and I gave my name every time I called. It didn't help.
Finally I discovered that public records could point me to the owner of the rented property (the police and the occupants had refused to tell me). I started writing letters and telling the owner everything that happened - turned out the owners were the parents of one of the occupants. They'd given up on parenting and bought their son a house because they couldn't keep him under control and they wouldn't throw him out on the street. Great.
I researched the law and learned about the seizure process and how the owners could lsoe everything by letting it continue, and that neighbors could sue for noise. I bluntly informed them of all this, and finally it looks like the creeps are moving out - 8 months of turmoil later. Finally I have peace and safety.
You will not understand the war on drugs until you've had to fight it yourself. Only then will you see why it's a war that we are going to keep fighting forever as long as we as a society decide we don't want to be around the stuff.
Re:USofA lost both. (Score:2, Interesting)
So I was advised!
I decided instead to fight the problem and pocket the "discount". If I'd waited or haggled, someone else would have snagged the property - I offered on the first day it was listed. Next time, I will spend some time staking out the property on Friday nights.
Gotta love California - or not.
SCO SUCKS (Score:4, Interesting)
In the case of $C0, those peaces of garbage stole code from Linux and misappropriated it into their software. A theft did NOT occur in the opposite direction.
And they're not very confident that they're going to win, those idiots. They just capped the lawyers' payments. THEY ARE GONNA LOSE! Nanny nanny boo boo.
Re:Your post is amusing. let's see why. (Score:0, Interesting)
There were definitely more than 15 foreign fighters in Fallujah, at least at the beginning. But apparently they were mostly driven out by two factors: 1)they acted like jerks (big surprise) and alienated the local population [washingtonpost.com] who wanted them out. 2) The US was killing them in bunches with air strikes like this [cnn.com] (14 dead) and this [cnn.com] (60 dead).
After leaving Fallujah, the foreign fighters have been heading to other parts of Iraq to try and cause turmoil. Fortunately, they are being gathered up, like in this incident in which Five foreign fighters who escaped from Fallujah nabbed [canoe.ca]
Foreign fighters have been in Iraq for some time.
U.S. Nabs 80 Foreign Fighters in Iraq [foxnews.com]
One Palestinian camp sent dozens of fighters to Iraq? [1accesshost.com]
Iraqi TV reports confessions from foreign fighters [usatoday.com] (19 of them)
40 Foreign Fighters Said Captured in Iraq [lancasteronline.com] by Iraqi National Guard
They foreign fighters in Iraq may not be a majority, but they are dangerous fanatics.
The idea that the majority of rebels in Iraq are foreign terrorists is a myth created by the new Iraqi government to make themselves look good to the US, and supported by Americans that don't want to believe that the Iraqis might not want what we're selling.
What we're selling? I'm afraid you've gone wrong there. The Coalition isn't selling anything, its giving. It has already given the Iraqis freedom from a regime that apparently killed about 60,000 people [iraqcoalition.org] in Baghdad alone.
Most Iraqis think that liberation from Saddam was the best thing to happen in the last 12 months, they want democracy, and are optimistic about the future. You can read more comments here [strategypage.com] about the Oxford Research Survery [bbc.co.uk], paid for by the BBC [bbc.co.uk].
Re:Apple & OS X (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple, of course, is contending that the term Unix has become a generic term and it not longer meets the needs of trademark protection.