Xref: utzoo misc.legal:4951 comp.misc:2490 comp.sys.att:3360 comp.sys.ibm.pc:16008
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!phri!manhat!mancol!samperi
From: samperi@mancol.UUCP (Dominick Samperi)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,comp.misc,comp.sys.att,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: AT&T vs. CSS (PC/Tools)
Keywords: AT&T, lawsuit, CSS, PC/Tools
Message-ID: <403@mancol.UUCP>
Date: 29 May 88 23:11:08 GMT
Organization: Manhattan College, NYC, USA
Lines: 19

The May issue of UNIX Review reports that AT&T won an out-of-court
settlement in its suit aginst Custom Software Systems, Inc. The
suit claimed that PC/Tools and PC/Spell, both marketed by CSS,
"used aspects of UNIX," but CSS did not purchase a license from
AT&T. Does this mean that it is illegal to market versions of
the standard tools (cp, mv, tar, etc.) for DOS or for other
operating systems, or enhanced versions of these tools for UNIX,
without first buying a license from AT&T?

Does AT&T have exclusive rights to use these utility names? Would it
still be illegal to market tools with similar capabilities that are
named differently?

What exactly does "used aspects of UNIX" mean anyway????
-- 
Dominick Samperi, Manhattan College, NYC
    manhat!samperi@NYU.EDU           ihnp4!rutgers!nyu.edu!manhat!samperi
    philabs!cmcl2!manhat!samperi     ihnp4!rutgers!hombre!samperi
              (^ that's an ell)      uunet!swlabs!mancol!samperi