SCO

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, der.hans wrote:

> Am 12. Mar, 2003 schw=E4tzte Jeremy C. Reed so:
>
> > I guess the distinction is not whether it is really commercial or not, =
but
> > if an end-product became entirely proprietary. Any examples?
>
> A couple of switch vendors, e.g. Juniper, use *BSD as their base with
> proprietary drivers for their hardware. There's also OS X. There have bee=
n
> at least a few embedded products that were based on proprietary *BSD
> releases. Probably most of them died in the last couple of years.

Yes, I know about many proprietary examples of BSD-licensed code.

For what it's worth: most of the BSD code used in Mac OS X is still
publically available and freely available (depending on the definition of
"free") in the Darwin OS project.

My point was that a lot of non-BSD code is "commercial" too.

> > Anyways, where is the detailed list of technologies (intellectual
> > property) that was used?
> >
> > I would like to compare with the old 4.4BSD-Lite which I still look at.
>
> Are the *BSD systems subject to the same claims?

That is what I am curious about: What are the claims?

If anyone is concerned, alternative code may be (or probably is) already
available in the *BSD families.

There were already BSD and UNIX lawsuits in early 1990's.

Jeremy C. Reed

http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/