Subject: Answer to Legal Qry

From: Warren Toomey <wkt>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:12:15 +1000 (EST)

Warren, 
	This is very good news.  Things are moving fast.
	Our legal guy is asking me some questions that I can't answer...
	perhaps you can help.

Thanks Dion, I've tab indented your email so you should be able to work
out what my lines are. Boy, there certainly are a lot of people involved!
I'll try and answer everything to the best of my ability.

	[ email from SCO's legal guy, lines with * are Dion's reply ]
	  Dion,
	  
	  The License has been written but we need some clarification on the
	  product the license will cover.
	  
	  In your original emails you stated that they wanted a license to
	  cover the old OS that ran on the PDP-11.  This is a 16-Bit machine. 
	  Old UNIX that ran on the 16-Bit was the UNIX Editions 1 - 7. 

Not just UNIX Research Editions 1 to 7 ran on PDP-11s. I think 8th Edition
did as well. Also, there were several variants derived from the Research
Editions, such as PWB (several flavours), MERT, Mini UNIX and AUSAM. There was
even a version of System V for the PDP-11. I don't know if there was a System
III which ran on PDP-11s.

We would really like coverage of ALL PDP-11 UNIX variants, but even coming
up with a list would be difficult. I think SCO would be touchy about selling
source code to System V, even if it was only for the PDP-11. I think we
would be happy to forego the System III and System V versions.

Summary: We would like a license to cover all PDP-11 UNIXes (and derived
works such as AUSAM and Mini UNIX) except the System III and System V versions.
I don't know if SCO can come up with legalese which would cover such a
general list, so the specific list we outlined in the petition would be fine.
If I left out PWB, MERT, Mini UNIX and AUSAM, then would you add them to the
list?!

	  32V UNIX ran on a 32-Bit machine not the PDP-11,

32V ran on the Vax. Ok, technically this was not a PDP-11, but the 32V
version of UNIX was essentially a straight port of 7th Edition over to the
Vax, with no additions (no virtual memory, no nothing). It's a very
historically important version of UNIX, and we would like to have it included.

Note importantly that the draft license so far will not permit us to install
32V on a Vax, so we can only view the source and documentation, not actually
run the software.

We would be prepared to lose this version, if it became a sticking point,
but it would still be nice to have it available for reading. Remember, we
want the license to cover not only PDP-11 owners, but people who have a
historical interest in UNIX. You'd be surprised how popular the `John Lions
Commentary on 6th Edition UNIX' is, even though few people own PDP-11s now.
	
	  your "2BSD release" is this the Berkely versions of UNIX? -
	  if it is, it could go up to our SVR4.0 and we do not want
	  to included this in our license.

I don't know if you have seen a diagram of the UNIX genealogy. Grab hold
of `Life with UNIX', or go to http://minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au/PUPS/node1.html,
and view the diagram there.

You will see that 1BSD and 2BSD are derived from 6th & 7th Edition UNIX.
3BSD was a split from the 2BSD branch, and then became 4BSD. So:

	6th
	 |
	 V
	1BSD
	 |
	 V
	2BSD ---> 3BSD ---> 4BSD
	 |		      |
	 V		      V

2BSD and subsequent versions run only on the PDP-11. Yes, later versions
such as 2.11BSD have taken some code from the 4.3BSD and 4.4BSD versions.

In terms or licensing, we are in a situation similar to the 4.4BSD-Lite
situation. The perception was that certain parts of 4.4 were derived `enough'
from old UNIX, and so were left out.

With 2BSD and its derivatives, we happily assert that there IS stuff left
over from 6th and 7th Edition. I am sure there is nothing taken from 32V
or from later versions of UNIX. All we want is the license to cover anything
still in 2BSD which is _derived_ from the early versions of UNIX.
	
If you want to limit the versions from which code can be derived, then
7th Edition or 32V would be suitable. I'm not the current maintainer of
2BSD; Steven Schultz is, and he is available by email at [email-masked].

I will pass this email on to Steven, as he is really the person who should
be negotiating with SCO over 2BSD. Please read my comments with a grain of
salt, and treat all comments from Steven as overriding my comments!

[ finally, some comments on the attached group discussion ]

	  >>>>It has to do with having people on our side...  important people,
	  >>>>people who dislike Microsoft and are not enamored of Sun.  ...
	  >>>>people who speak at conferences, influence decision makers and
	  >>>>mentor students.

Step back a bit & leave out the factional stuff. You've got a chance here 
of winning loyalty from the whole UNIX community. You have already:

	+ made binary licenses for old systems freely available
	+ given permission for the Lions Commentary to be distributed

If you add:

	+ cheap licenses for old & historically important UNIX systems

then you have stood up and said:

	These three events show that we believe in the heritage of UNIX,
	both the fact that the software was available in source form, but
	that what helped make UNIX so strong was the community spirit that
	pervaded the early development of UNIX.

	We want to repay our debt to the UNIX community and we feel that
	by (doing these 3 things) we have in some measure done so.

These three events, together, are a real PR coup. Don't overlook that!!

	  >>>> We could make it better if we find time to create a real
	  >>>> historical archive of this stuff, but that can happen over
	  >>>> time.  The licensees would help us.

Yes, we sure would!! Especially if SCO can dig up any other tapes lying
around which we don't have.

	  >>>>	>UNIX is a research/academic tool.  The technical community
	  >>>>	>respects UNIX (they do not respect NT very much).  We
	  >>>>	>need to leverage that respect and act as if we are the
	  >>>>	>keepers of the UNIX heritage.

I think it's a mind set thing: accessible source code vs. non-accessible
source code, or ``Use the source, Luke''. UNIX was brought up in this mind
set. Sun's playing on this with their release of source code to academic
institutions -- they're gaining kudos, not money. They're buying reputation.

Anyway, I could go on & on with comments. You know how I feel. SCO gains
kudos, reputation and goodwill out of this. Sure you can't put a $ value on
it, but I hope it will strengthen the market perception of SCO as a willing
and helpful part of the UNIX community.

Please pass my comments on to the legal eagle & to the others involved in SCO.
P.S Can you get people to call me Warren & not Toomey :-) I'm a 1st name guy.

Thanks again & expect a follow-up reply from Steven Schultz about 2BSD.

	Warren

---

From: Dion <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 97 16:01:00 PDT

Still more answers, questions, and comments, at the left margin.

   From sco.sco.com!henry.cs.adfa.oz.au!wkt Sat Aug 30 21:15:28 1997
   From: Warren Toomey <[email-masked]>
   Subject: Answer to Legal Qry
   To: [email-masked]
   Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:12:15 +1000 (EST)
   Cc: [email-masked]
   Reply-To: [email-masked]
   
   	Warren, 

   	  

   Not just UNIX Research Editions 1 to 7 ran on PDP-11s.  I think
   8th Edition did as well.  Also, there were several variants
   derived from the Research Editions, such as PWB (several
   flavours), MERT, Mini UNIX and AUSAM.  There was even a version
   of System V for the PDP-11.  I don't know if there was a System
   III which ran on PDP-11s.
   
   We would really like coverage of ALL PDP-11 UNIX variants, but
   even coming up with a list would be difficult.  I think SCO would
   be touchy about selling source code to System V, even if it was
   only for the PDP-11.  I think we would be happy to forego the
   System III and System V versions.
   
   Summary: We would like a license to cover all PDP-11 UNIXes (and
   derived works such as AUSAM and Mini UNIX) except the System III
   and System V versions.  I don't know if SCO can come up with
   legalese which would cover such a general list, so the specific
   list we outlined in the petition would be fine.  If I left out
   PWB, MERT, Mini UNIX and AUSAM, then would you add them to the
   list?!  32V UNIX ran on a 32-Bit machine not the PDP-11,

Who owns or originated these derived works?
PWB came from ATT, I guess.
MERT?
AUSAM?
Mini UNIX?
   
   32V ran on the Vax.  Ok, technically this was not a PDP-11, but
   the 32V version of UNIX was essentially a straight port of 7th
   Edition over to the Vax, with no additions (no virtual memory, no
   nothing).  It's a very historically important version of UNIX,
   and we would like to have it included.
   
   Note importantly that the draft license so far will not permit us
   to install 32V on a Vax, so we can only view the source and
   documentation, not actually run the software.

Right.  I pointed this out to our legal guys.
   
   We would be prepared to lose this version, if it became a
   sticking point, but it would still be nice to have it available
   for reading.  Remember, we want the license to cover not only
   PDP-11 owners, but people who have a historical interest in UNIX.
   You'd be surprised how popular the `John Lions Commentary on 6th
   Edition UNIX' is, even though few people own PDP-11s now.

   I don't know if you have seen a diagram of the UNIX genealogy.
   Grab hold of `Life with UNIX', or go to
   http://minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au/PUPS/node1.html, and view the diagram
   there.
   
   You will see that 1BSD and 2BSD are derived from 6th & 7th
   Edition UNIX.  3BSD was a split from the 2BSD branch, and then
   became 4BSD.  So:
   
   	6th
   	 |
   	 V
   	1BSD
   	 |
   	 V
   	2BSD ---> 3BSD ---> 4BSD
   	 |		      |
   	 V		      V

   

Exactly.

   

This was some mail I addressed to one of our VPs, actually.

Yes, of course.  The factionalism was for the VP's consumption.

   If you add:

   

Quite so.

Dont hold your breath, but I will try to excite some interest from
the New Jersey folks.  Strangely, they are not very enthusiastic
about this.

   

Yes, I will try to remember to do so.

Got it already.
   
   	Warren