Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!wb3ffv!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake
From: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Licenses and sublicenses (was Re: Interactive and me)
Summary: Your UNIX vendor has the AT&T license, not you.
Message-ID: <2@raysnec.UUCP>
Date: 22 Jul 90 17:53:35 GMT
References: <1611@ssbn.WLK.COM> <1990Jul17.003323.29143@pegasus.com> <111@raysnec.UUCP> <1990Jul19.142101.26048@pegasus.com>
Reply-To: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake)
Distribution: usa
Organization: IRS/CI - Technical Solutions Branch
Lines: 16

In article <1990Jul19.142101.26048@pegasus.com> richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) writes:
>
>I must admit that it has been quite some time since I've read a Unix
>license agreement.  But the ones I have read bore no resemblance to
>this description.
>
>The AT&T license is necessarily separate since it doesn't apply to the
>porters code.

	Sorry Charlie. *You* don't get the AT&T license; your vendor does.
	That license gives the vendor the right to resell based on the
	licensed code. It's sometimes called a Distribution Sub-license.

	INTERACTIVE's license, for example, includes the following statement:
	"The Software and its copyrights are owned by INTERACTIVE or its
	suppliers". And we know who at least one of those suppliers are. 8-)