Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!mtunx!rutgers!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: OSF Keywords: AT&T, licensing Message-ID: <8052@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: 9 Jun 88 02:03:38 GMT References: <8806072015.AA20190@decwrl.dec.com> <8039@brl-smoke.ARPA> <5150@nsc.nsc.com> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 18 In article <5150@nsc.nsc.com> glennw@nsc.UUCP (Glenn Weinberg) writes: >>Certainly this completely misdescribes the AT&T UNIX System V Release >>2 and 3 source licenses and sublicensing agreements that BRL signed. >You mean that BRL can ship a version of V.3 that doesn't pass SVVS? No, I meant that the article I was responding to misdescribed the AT&T UNIX System V Release 2 and 3 source licenses and sublicensing agreements. I explained this before, but for example there is no "renewal" necessary. BRL is not actually a VAR; our sublicensing is for our internal needs. I checked carefully to make sure that we did not have to be fully SVID- compliant within our "site" (actually all of Aberdeen Proving Ground). In fact the SVID requirement goes into effect after the end of this month; systems shipped before that date are exempt, as are those shipped under SVR2 licensing. As a software USER, I rather like the requirement. I'm tired of getting systems advertised as "UNIX" that have some warped notion of what that means.