Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:3684 comp.unix.questions:7913 comp.sys.ibm.pc:16889
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!killer!dcs!wnp
From: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,comp.unix.questions,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: MKS Toolkit/UNIX [r] System, SEA ARC/PKARC, ...
Keywords: AT&T, lawsuit, CSS, PC/Tools, PC/VI
Message-ID: <132@dcs.UUCP>
Date: 2 Jul 88 12:38:34 GMT
References: <403@mancol.UUCP> <102@dcs.UUCP> <395@hotlr.ATT> <109@dcs.UUCP> <482@mks.UUCP> <1624@hoqax.UUCP>
Reply-To: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: DCS, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 26

In article <1624@hoqax.UUCP> bicker@hoqax.UUCP (The Resource, Poet of Quality) writes:
>> In article <166@skep2.ATT.COM>, wcs@skep2.ATT.COM (Bill.Stewart.<ho95c>) writes:
>> >b) MKS has ported some UNIX tools and reimplemented others and is presumably
>> >   following the rules for the products they use,
>
>This raises a question in my mind in light of all the talk about
>SEA suing PK Ware over the "look" of the archive tools.  If SEA has
>a case doesn't AT&T?  

It remains to be seen whether SEA has a case. They think so, obviously. I'm
still not convinced that they base their case on look & feel, though. Reports
quoted on the Net vary quite a bit as to what the issue really is.

In any case, it seems to me that AT&T has chosen not to make look & feel an 
issue in the case of UNIX utilities: they have long ignored such UNIX look-alike
products as Coherent, Idris, Minix, QNX, and even MS-DOS (DOS mkdir looks &
feels a lot like UNIX mkdir to me :-)).

It should also be reiterated what Alex White of MKS said recently: NONE of the
MKS Toolkit utilities are PORTED -- they are all re-implementations, containing
no AT&T source whatsoever.

-- 
Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101
UUCP:     killer!dcs!wnp                 ESL: 62832882
DOMAIN:   wnp@dcs.UUCP                   TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD