Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!LIGHTNING.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU!mouse
From: mouse@LIGHTNING.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: The real OpenWindows source announcement
Message-ID: <9011200528.AA16660@lightning.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
Date: 20 Nov 90 05:28:53 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 31

>>>>> free of charge (cost of media only -- $995).
>>>> If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about
>>>> selling them blank tapes.
> Well it seems there is an answer to all this. In attempting to make
> OpenWindows freely available Sun had to negotiate with AT&T.
> Apparently some AT&T code exists in OW 2.0 or own some rights to it.
> Therefore, the best deal(?) Sun could come up with was to charge a
> rather large one time fee for docs and media yet allow you to copy
> source freely.

It's not free if you can't give it away to the world.  That's why I
suspect the label "free" is doublespeak: letting the source out free
but charging for binary redistribution is a little unlikely.

So, you want me to believe the source is free, you put it up for
anonymous ftp.  Until then, I will continue to maintain that it's not
free and that calling it so is doublespeak at best, misleading
advertising (which incidentally is actionable, I think) at worst.

> So it is not as great a deal as we all wish it would have been, but I
> think Sun has got the right intentions.  Let us hope that OpenWindows
> version 3 will be kept clear of all of these licensing issues.

I don't want to give the idea that I think Sun shouldn't be offering
this $1000 source-tape-plus-doc-set.  What I take exception to is their
calling it free when (if) it's not.

					der Mouse

			old: mcgill-vision!mouse
			new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu