Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site houxj.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!houxm!houxj!wapd
From: wapd@houxj.UUCP (Bill Dietrich)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: UNIX and real-time and when is UNIX UNIX
Message-ID: <428@houxj.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Nov-84 10:50:34 EST
Article-I.D.: houxj.428
Posted: Wed Nov 14 10:50:34 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 15-Nov-84 03:18:59 EST
References: <115@decvax.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 35



I can't resist stating what I understand to be the
legally correct definition of "Unix".  Although I
am an employee of ATT Bell Laboratories, this is
not an official statement and I may be wrong about
various details.

I think the official legal definition is that ATT's
implementation of Unix System V and the implementations
done by Motorola, National, Zilog and Intel under
agreement with ATT are the only items that can be
called "the Unix operating system".

Things like BSD 4.X which (I believe) are built from
ATT code originally and (I believe) require fees to
be paid to ATT (probably an agreement between Berkeley
and ATT) are properly called "Unix-based operating
systems".

Things like PC/IX and others which provide similar
or identical functionality but are not based on ATT
code at all are properly called "Unix look-alikes".

Also, I believe that ATTBL has trademarked "Unix"
(or registered it somehow) as an adjective only, so
that it is improper to say "Unix has pipes".
Correct form would be "the Unix operating system
has pipes".

Just thought I would try to state the "official"
position, to muddy the waters further.

				Bill Dietrich
				houxj!wapd