Full Steam Ahead with License

From: Warren Toomey < wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199803022328.KAA08076@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
To: dionj@sco.COM (Dion Johnson)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 10:28:19 +1100 (EST)
Cc: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
In-Reply-To: <19980302152605.46176@sco.com> from Dion Johnson at "Mar 2, 98 03:26:05 pm"
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Dion Johnson:
> I am going to give myself the go-ahead and not bother those busy
> legal folks any more.

Goodo.
 
> It looks like we may be able to permit credit cards and Intl Money Orders.
> Are VISA and AMEX enough cards to support? I should know pretty soon on this.

I suspect that would be fine.
 
> > Someone asked if a password-protected ftp site would be ok?
> > I thought that it might contravene the license. What's your opinion?
> 
> As long as you know WHO has the password, that would be in accordance
> with the license, as I read it.
> -Dion

That's excellent news, Dion. I'll cc this to the PUPS mailing list.

Thanks again,

	Warren

Message-ID: <19980303122430.47237@freebie.lemis.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 12:24:30 +1030
From: Greg Lehey < grog@lemis.com>
To: Dion Johnson < dionj@sco.COM>
Cc: PDP Unix Preservation < pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
References: <19980302152605.46176@sco.com> <199803022328.KAA08076@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <199803022328.KAA08076@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>; from Warren Toomey on Tue, Mar 03, 1998 at 10:28:19AM +1100
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286
Fax: +61-8-8388-8725
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

On Tue,  3 March 1998 at 10:28:19 +1100, Warren Toomey wrote:
> In article by Dion Johnson:
>> I am going to give myself the go-ahead and not bother those busy
>> legal folks any more.
>
> Goodo.

Great news!

>> It looks like we may be able to permit credit cards and Intl Money Orders.
>> Are VISA and AMEX enough cards to support? I should know pretty soon on this.
>
> I suspect that would be fine.

I would think that you should add MasterCard to that list, possibly
instead of Amexco.

Where do we go from here?  Can we start to bombard you with
license applications?

Greg

From: Warren Toomey < wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199803030213.NAA08617@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:13:33 +1100 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <19980303122430.47237@freebie.lemis.com> from Greg Lehey at "Mar 3, 98 12:24:30 pm"
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Greg Lehey:
> >> It looks like we may be able to permit credit cards and Intl Money Orders.
> 
> I would think that you should add MasterCard to that list, possibly
> instead of Amexco.
> 
> Where do we go from here?  Can we start to bombard [Dion] with
> license applications?
> Greg

Dion sent me this suggestion:

	So I guess what we have is this:
	1. Prospective licensee gets the license from [PUPS] website.
	2. He signs and sends to SCO and sends his $100 to SF PO box.
	3. Someone here [at SCO] lets [PUPS] know that he is a licensee.
	4. [PUPS] can send him the source code  (and charge a fee for that
   	   as you see fit).

SCO wants the license on paper. I asked him for the final license in a
form suitable for printing, e.g PostScript, PDF, Word format (gasp!).

Greg's suggestion about MasterCard went to Dion as well. I guess we just
have to sit back & wait until we get the word (and the final license)
from Dion.

As soon as I have all the details, there will be a description of the
steps you need to perform in order to get a license placed on the PUPS
home page.

Cheers all,

	Warren

From: Neil Johnson < neil@skatter.usask.ca>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 10:32:06 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199803031632.KAA00644@hydrus.USask.Ca>
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au, wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

Another suggestion - keep a list of the licencees on the PUPS website. That
way everyone would know who they could exchange software with. Most new
stuff would probably end up on the site anyway, but during development
it might be good to know.

Neil

From: Tim Shoppa < shoppa@alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9803031708.AA24509@alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
To: neil@skatter.usask.ca (Neil Johnson)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 09:08:37 -0800 (PST)
Cc: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au, wkt@CS.ADFA.OZ.AU
In-Reply-To: <199803031632.KAA00644@hydrus.USask.Ca> from "Neil Johnson" at Mar 3, 98 10:32:06 am
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

> Another suggestion - keep a list of the licencees on the PUPS website. That
> way everyone would know who they could exchange software with. Most new
> stuff would probably end up on the site anyway, but during development
> it might be good to know.

As most all of the "new stuff" lately seems to be 2.11BSD-related,
this brings up a (probably silly) question of mine: what's the
relationship between the SCO license agreement and 2.9, 2.10, and 2.11BSD?
Will the SCO license be functionally equivalent to a WE/AT&T source
license (other than the per-machine limitations)?  In other words,
are the 2BSD distributions "SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEMS" in the language
of the agreement?

Another stupid question: few of us (perhaps I'm the only one) have
CD-ROM readers/writers attached to PDP-11's.  Will those who have to
transfer the source kit through a PC-clone or other Unix workstation
have to license the intermediary machines with SCO?  In other words,
will the intermediary machines need to be registered as "DESIGNATED
CPU"s?

Tim.

From: Warren Toomey < wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199803032110.IAA15973@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 08:10:42 +1100 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <9803031708.AA24509@alph02.triumf.ca> from Tim Shoppa at "Mar 3, 98 09:08:37 am"
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Tim Shoppa:
> > Another suggestion - keep a list of the licencees on the PUPS website. That
> > way everyone would know who they could exchange software with. Most new
> > stuff would probably end up on the site anyway, but during development
> > it might be good to know.
> 
> As most all of the "new stuff" lately seems to be 2.11BSD-related,
> this brings up a (probably silly) question of mine: what's the
> relationship between the SCO license agreement and 2.9, 2.10, and 2.11BSD?
> Will the SCO license be functionally equivalent to a WE/AT&T source
> license (other than the per-machine limitations)?  In other words,
> are the 2BSD distributions "SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEMS" in the language
> of the agreement?

2BSDs are definitely SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEMS as they are derived from
the listed products (6th, 7th Edition and 32V) and are 16-bit operating
systems.
 
> Another stupid question: few of us (perhaps I'm the only one) have
> CD-ROM readers/writers attached to PDP-11's.  Will those who have to
> transfer the source kit through a PC-clone or other Unix workstation
> have to license the intermediary machines with SCO?  In other words,
> will the intermediary machines need to be registered as "DESIGNATED
> CPU"s?

My interpretation is this:

	DESIGNATED CPU means all CPUs licensed as such for a specific
	SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.

	SCO grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and
	nonexclusive right to use, in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY, each SOURCE
	CODE PRODUCT identified in Section 3 of this Agreement, solely
	for personal use [..] and solely on or in conjunction with
	DESIGNATED CPUs [...]. Such right to use includes the right to
	modify such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT and to prepare DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT
	based on such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT,

In my opinion, you can't USE the source code unless you have a CPU which
run the machine code which is produced by the source code. I can't prepare
a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT if I don't have a PDP-11 or an emulator of such.

I'd better check with Dion.

	Warren

From: Warren Toomey < wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199803032116.IAA16053@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Full Steam Ahead with License
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 08:16:37 +1100 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <199803031632.KAA00644@hydrus.USask.Ca> from Neil Johnson at "Mar 3, 98 10:32:06 am"
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Neil Johnson:
> Another suggestion - keep a list of the licencees on the PUPS website. That
> way everyone would know who they could exchange software with. Most new
> stuff would probably end up on the site anyway, but during development
> it might be good to know.

This is a good idea, but I'd be happy for a licencee to opt out from the
list if they so desired.

	Warren

From: Warren Toomey < wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199803032221.JAA17553@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: From Dion: intermediate CPUs
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 09:21:10 +1100 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

----- Forwarded message from Dion Johnson -----

> > Will those who have to
> > transfer the source kit through a PC-clone or other Unix workstation
> > have to license the intermediary machines with SCO?  In other words,
> > will the intermediary machines need to be registered as "DESIGNATED
> > CPU"s?
> 
> I hope not!
> 	Warren

Right, that makes no sense at all.  I suspect we (you and I) will 
want to whip up a sort of cover letter for the license that
explains how to fill out the form and, as experience accumulates,
a FAQ, etc.
-Dion

----- End of forwarded message from Dion Johnson -----

From: Warren Toomey < wkt@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199803100040.LAA10668@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Just in from Dion
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 11:40:59 +1100 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

Guys,
	Just got this in from Dion re the license. No word as to date of
availability yet, I did say `we're waiting....' though.

I sent Dion a draft set of instructions on how to get the license.
Part of his return email goes:

	> 4. For AUTHORIZED COUNTRY, I suggest writing:
	> 
	>       All countries not excluded by Section 5.2

	Yes, very good.  I have no idea how to find that damned
	govt list.  I think our reference is out of date but who

	> 5. You need to list the DESIGNATED CPUs. [Do we? I can't see where
	>    on the draft to fill this in] If you have PDP-11 hardware,
	>    list the number and models of PDP-11s, e.g

	No, it doesnt say that.  It says that on our request, you must
	furnish the list, but we dont demand it up front.  In practice,
	I doubt we will ever ask anyone to furnish this, much less
	do an on-site visit.  Of course, it might be a fun way to
	win a trip to Australia if I volunteer to go on a tour to
	see that our highly valuable intellectual property is 
	being treated right... ;-)

That sounds good to me.

	Warren