free sco unix

[Peter Vereshagin]

You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 12:46:20 -0600 Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com> => To freebsd-questions at freebsd.org :
CP> > But both are just words/phrases, right?
CP> 
CP> Here's an example of the difference:

Good example, it's on-topic ;-)

CP> UNIX, the name, is a trademark.  We can use it all we like here, speaking

Do we need a license to use it? ;-)

CP> about the UNIX trademark, its applicability, who owns the trademark, and
CP> so on.  We just can't claim *we* own it, misapply it to things to which

So it's just enough to reserve a copyright on this word usage and we will have
just another reason why we can't claim we own it ;-)

Sorry my confusion, it's just a new thing to me and it seems as absurd as those
ideas.

CP> it does not legally apply, and so on (subject to some fair use
CP> exceptions, such as parodies).
CP> 
CP> The source code of a closed source UNIX operating system such as HP-UX is
CP> not trademarked, because it is not an identifying mark.  Because it is
CP> subject to copyright, if one of us has legally gained access to it, we
CP> cannot just post it all in its entirety to the mailing list (assuming
CP> that posting that much source to the list wasn't a problem in and of
CP> itself) without violating copyright laws of most industrialized
CP> countries -- regardless of what we said about it.
CP> 
CP> The difference is that trademarks are used to identify some entity and
CP> its creations, while copyrights are used to censor the redistribution of
CP> creations themselves.
CP> 
CP> -- 
CP> Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


73! Peter pgp: A0E26627 (4A42 6841 2871 5EA7 52AB  12F8 0CE1 4AAC A0E2 6627)
--
http://vereshagin.org