Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA08520
	for pups-liszt; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 17:13:17 +1100 (EST)
Received: from allegro.lemis.com (allegro.lemis.com [192.109.197.134])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA08508
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 17:13:01 +1100 (EST)
Received: from freebie.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137])
	by allegro.lemis.com (8.9.1/8.9.0) with ESMTP id QAA06234;
	Tue, 5 Jan 1999 16:42:35 +1030 (CST)
Received: (from grog@localhost)
	by freebie.lemis.com (8.9.1/8.9.0) id QAA79334;
	Tue, 5 Jan 1999 16:42:42 +1030 (CST)
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 16:42:41 +1030
From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms@moe.2bsd.com>
Cc: wkt@cs.adfa.oz.au, pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Why is csh `restricted'?
Message-ID: <19990105164241.E78349@freebie.lemis.com>
References: <199901050557.VAA19580@moe.2bsd.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i
In-Reply-To: <199901050557.VAA19580@moe.2bsd.com>; from Steven M. Schultz on Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 09:57:01PM -0800
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.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

On Monday,  4 January 1999 at 21:57:01 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
>> From: Warren Toomey <wkt@henry.cs.adfa.edu.au>
>> What else in the original 2bsd is contaminated?
>
> 	Anything that I (or other contributors) didn't write ourselves.
>
> 	A good case can be made that stuff ported from 4.4-Lite is not
> 	contaminated (because 4.4-Lite had the legal blessings of AT&T)
> 	but I was told at one time anything based on the Net-2 stuff could be
> 	(is?) contaminated.

There has been a lot of confusion on this point.  Well, maybe
``disagreement'' would be a better word.  Obviously Net-2 contained
almost only stuff written by contributors, though there was, indeed,
some code which had obviously grown out of Seventh Edition code.  I
think somebody mentioned something like 13 files in the context of the
lawsuit.  I took a look at one (kern_clock.c?), and confirmed that
yes, it looked as if it was derived rather than written from scratch.
On the other hand, there was nothing which AT&T (or the opponent of
the week) could claim to be trade secrets.  And IMO none of this could
have been construed to mean that people couldn't use the sources which
were indisputably completely written by UCB and its contributors.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers
finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key

