Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!MSC.EDU!tjs
From: tjs@MSC.EDU (Tim Salo)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: IEEE 802.3 Driver for Xircom Adapter
Message-ID: <9106121507.AA13441@uh.msc.edu>
Date: 12 Jun 91 15:07:35 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 27

> Date: 12 Jun 91 05:49:14 GMT
> Subject: Re: IEEE 802.3 Driver for Xircom Adapter
> 	[...]
> They would have one if they weren't such scum (see below).  
> 	[...]
> Then I heard that they had reneged on our agreement [...]
> 	[...]
> However, they continued to distribute the one derived from my
> code so I called for a boycott of their products.
> 	[...]
> So, I guess they get away with their theft.
> 	[...]
> --russ <nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu> I'm proud to be a humble Quaker.

Please move this to a more appropriate forum, such as the courts.

I have no idea what the actual facts are in this case, but software 
copyright contains lots of grey areas, (e.g., when is software a 
derivative work?).  I doubt further discussion here will enlighten me.

At least in court some third party (not me) can listen to arguments 
and render an opinion based on some understanding of the facts and the law.

Your counsel may also be able to advise you about libel.

Tim Salo
tjs@msc.edu