Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:5866 comp.mail.uucp:1049
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!aurora!eos!ames!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!homxb!genesis!andys
From: andys@genesis.ATT.COM (a.b.sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Packet size & number of windows in UUCP
Message-ID: <438@genesis.ATT.COM>
Date: 29 Feb 88 00:14:16 GMT
References: <567@acornrc.UUCP> <13668@pyramid.pyramid.com> <788@vixie.UUCP> <398@cogen.UUCP> <157@istop.ist.CO.UK> <15322@pyramid.pyramid.com> <4684@mcdchg.UUCP> <20522@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Reply-To: andys@shlepper.ATT.COM (a.b.sherman)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Middletown, N.J.
Lines: 23
Summary: It ain't free

In article <20522@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
>   [description of AT&T software licensing practices]
>I do not know how well such a policy can be enforced.  But we play by
>the rules at my company. Who wants to tangle with AT&T lawyers? 
>
>If it seems like a rip off, complain to AT&T.
>
>-- 
>I speak for myself, not the company.
>
>Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or phil@amd.com

We play by the rules at AT&T too.  We pay for AMD chips (unless
they're samples :-) ) and we don't try to copy AMD designs.  Getting
a fair return for the expense of developing software is no more a
ripoff than getting a fair return for developing chips.  If chips
were as easy to copy as programs, you'd find yourself in the same
boat we are in.
-- 
andy sherman / at&t bell laboratories (medical diagnostic systems)
room 2h-097 / 480 red hill road / middletown, nj 07748
(201) 615-5708 / andys@shlepper.ATT.COM
...The views and opinions are my own.  Who else would want them?