Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: uucp source copyright status - IMPORTANT
Message-ID: <7865@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 4-Apr-87 02:18:04 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.7865
Posted: Sat Apr  4 02:18:04 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Apr-87 02:18:04 EST
References: <480@gouldsd.UUCP> <694@brl-sem.ARPA> <73@bnl.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 21

> What about people who have obtained UNIX sources without ever being bound
> by an AT&T license agreement?  The site they got them from is in trouble,
> but what legal action can AT&T take against the individual? (not that
> anybody in their right mind would want to be the test case...

My understanding [BEWARE, I am not a lawyer, consult an expert before doing
anything rash!] is that much depends on how such a person came by those
Unix sources.  If he knew it was AT&T proprietary material, or if the
proverbial "reasonable man" should have known this in his situation, he is
in just as much trouble as the site he got it from.  If he truly and
reasonably thought the stuff wasn't proprietary -- hard to imagine for Unix
stuff -- then he is theoretically blameless.  (This doesn't mean he can't
be sued, of course.  It doesn't even mean that such a suit would fail.
And even successfully fighting off an AT&T lawsuit would probably bankrupt
most anyone.)

I caution people once again to get professional advice before taking any
action on the above informal amateur commentary.  You're playing with fire.
-- 
"We must choose: the stars or	Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
the dust.  Which shall it be?"	{allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry