Xref: utzoo misc.legal:4980 comp.misc:2530 comp.sys.att:3413 comp.sys.ibm.pc:16161 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!ames!killer!dcs!wnp From: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) Newsgroups: misc.legal,comp.misc,comp.sys.att,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: AT&T vs. CSS (PC/Tools) Keywords: AT&T, lawsuit, CSS, PC/Tools Message-ID: <109@dcs.UUCP> Date: 6 Jun 88 12:03:54 GMT References: <403@mancol.UUCP> <102@dcs.UUCP> <395@hotlr.ATT> Reply-To: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) Organization: DCS, Dallas, Texas Lines: 20 In article <395@hotlr.ATT> chuck@hotlr.UUCP (54316 - C J Luciano hotld) writes: > > > The reason I say this is that there have been other, commercially more > > significant, UNIX-lookalikes which AT&T did not bother. Also, when PC/VI > > first made its appearance, a friend of mine in the Boston area told me > > he had heard from a friend who had access to both UNIX and PC/VI source > > code that the sources resembled each other so closely, down to flaws in > > the coding style, that he was conviced PC/VI was a rip-off. > >I believe that AT&T would not be the one who should be concerned here since >VI is licensed by AT&T from University of California at Berkeley. Therefore >it's UCB's problem. However, in order to have access to BSD source you need a UNIX source license, which these folks presumably did not have. Also, I would not be surprised to find out that vi/ex contains large chunks of ed source. -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: ihnp4!killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp@dcs.UUCP TLX: 910-280-0585 EES PLANO UD