shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (09/14/90)
david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: >CMU's plan is to do whatever they can to free it from the little snippets >of AT&T and Berkeley code that are left. >It's quite doable, just takes some effort and time is all. Would not such an effort require that the developers work in "clean room" conditions? Recall that development of legitimate VGA and PC BIOS that would stand the legal test required that that those engaged in the effort work from nothing but specifications. In this case, developers might work from nothing more than POSIX, SVID or X/Open specifications. But how many top-notch programmers interested in such an effort have had no exposure to AT&T/BSD source code?
james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) (09/15/90)
In <73@raysnec.UUCP>, shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) wrote: > david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: | CMU's plan is to do whatever they can to free it from the little | snippets of AT&T and Berkeley code that are left. It's quite doable, | just takes some effort and time is all. > Would not such an effort require that the developers work in "clean room" > conditions? That is not obvious. "Vault v. Quaid" a couple of years ago clearly stated that direct copying of code was permissible if that code was insigificent (32 bytes in that case - 5th circuit appeals court). > Recall that development of legitimate VGA and PC BIOS that would stand > the legal test required that that those engaged in the effort work > from nothing but specifications. I don't believe that any of BIOS "cloning" was tested legally. Hence we do not know if the "clean room" approach was insufficient or overkill. There have been very few good legal tests of software copyright law. "Good legal test" means a case at the appellate level that actually addresses a gray area directly. The "Vault v. Quaid" case didn't say how much direct copying was permissible, but at least it said "some not none". -- James R. Van Artsdalen james@bigtex.cactus.org "Live Free or Die" Dell Computer Co 9505 Arboretum Blvd Austin TX 78759 512-338-8789
shore@mtxinu.COM (Melinda Shore) (09/16/90)
david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: >CMU's plan is to do whatever they can to free it from the little snippets >of AT&T and Berkeley code that are left. LITTLE SNIPPETS??? Yeesh. Besides, it's not just AT&T and Berkeley. Where do you think the vnode code came fron? How about the drivers? The sooner all of you who want something for nothing get cracking on writing device drivers, utilities, and so on, the sooner you'll have your completely unencumbered OS. You'll still need to wait for AT&T to certify the code clean, though. -- Melinda Shore shore@mtxinu.com mt Xinu ..!uunet!mtxinu.com!shore