Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site seismo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!stev
From: stev@seismo.UUCP (Stev Knowles)
Newsgroups: net.micro.att
Subject: Re: XENIX 3.0
Message-ID: <2408@seismo.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-May-85 02:58:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: seismo.2408
Posted: Fri May 24 02:58:44 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 25-May-85 06:17:00 EDT
References: <2343@seismo.UUCP> <10846@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Distribution: na
Organization: Center for Seismic Studies, Arlington, VA
Lines: 26

In article <10846@brl-tgr.ARPA>, ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) writes:
> > 
> > * XENIX is a trademark, possibly of att,
> > * the washington post, thought, is NOT a trademark of att.
> 
> XENIX is a trademark of Microsoft.

ok folks, another mind boggling question. who owns the trademark XENIX?

microsoft markets a product they call XENIX, but it is for the ibm pc/at.
a company called, i believe, the santa cruise operation markets a product
they call XENIX also. it is this second unix that i refered to in the article
i posted, although i did not realize it when i posted it.

as i understood it, from a discussion with an att engineer a while ago(read
~2 years), att licenced other companies to port and distribute UNIX on their
own, with the stipulations that att be paid a royality, and that the final
product contain a UN prefix or a IX suffix.

well? i have gotten some letters correcting the mistake i made, and thanks for 
not flaming me, and some letters about the XENIX from sco.
so i leave it to you att people, or people with copies of this stuff,
if you feel ambitious enough to look it up, who owns these names, if anyone?

stev@seismo  (you couldn't find me? look harder, i think i'm worth it,
	      even if no one else does. and most dont)