Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!bloom-beacon!ambar
From: ambar@athena.mit.edu (Jean Marie Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio.packet,comp.unix.wizards,news.admin
Subject: Re: Is this kosher?
Message-ID: <515@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 4-May-87 02:54:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: bloom-be.515
Posted: Mon May  4 02:54:51 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 5-May-87 00:42:43 EDT
References: <5691@eddie.MIT.EDU> <5981@hi.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: ambar@athena.mit.edu (Jean Marie Diaz)
Organization: Madhouse International Technologies
Lines: 19
Summary: nope, but don't blame MIT
Xref: mnetor rec.ham-radio.packet:292 comp.unix.wizards:2134 news.admin:399

In article <5981@hi.UUCP> kurt@hi.UUCP (Kurt Zeilenga) writes:
>Found in rec.ham-radio.packet:
>
>In article <5691@eddie.MIT.EDU> yossi%TAURUS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu (Yossi Eilati) writes:

[header from Berkeley-copyrighted source deleted]

>If MIT can get away with this, do you think I could post the kernal
>source and not get sued?

I wouldn't bet my account on it.  First of all, it's not MIT "getting
away with this".  The only reason that that message has an eddie.mit.edu
ID is that the ARPANET mailing list it came from is gatewayed to the
USENET at mit-eddie.  The poster, and his real address, is in the
attribution line.

I'm not claiming that it's any better to float copyrighted source around
the ARPANET than around the USENET; I just want mit-eddie kept out of
it...