Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ames!amdcad!phil
From: phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d,misc.legal
Subject: Re: COPYRIGHT NOTICES (on program sources, of course)
Message-ID: <18119@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: Fri, 28-Aug-87 21:55:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdcad.18119
Posted: Fri Aug 28 21:55:43 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Aug-87 06:23:32 EDT
References: <6236@brl-smoke.ARPA> <25095@sun.uucp> <12133@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <357@mcdsun.UUCP> <2267@xanth.UUCP> <455@hscfvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices
Lines: 20
Summary: DEC got it wrong
Xref: mnetor comp.sources.d:1197 misc.legal:2611

In article <455@hscfvax.UUCP> mohamed@hscfvax.UUCP (750025@Mohamed_el_Lozy) writes:
>The current 2.0 release of Ultrix also contains a gnuemacs tar file.
>Since DEC lawyers are certainly careful they must have concluded
>that it was safe to do so.

I wouldn't go by that. The deqna driver included in 4.3 BSD
(/sys/vaxif/if_qe.c) is licensed from DEC and is allegedly DEC
property but DEC can't even do a simple copyright. It reads 
Copyright Company Date instead of Copyright Date Company. 

They also have that other common mistake: "(This software) is supplied
"As Is" without expressed or implied warranty", when I thought the
magic word was "express", not "expressed". (I got this impression from
reading the crypt man page. Anyone know which is correct?)

You may think I'm a nit picker but lawyers are funny people.
-- 
I speak for myself, not the company.

Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or amdcad!phil@decwrl.dtors. .