> On Sep 5, 2018, at 10:38 AM, Clem Cole <cl...@ccc.com> wrote:
>
> below...
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:36 AM Al Kossow <a...@bitsavers.org> wrote:
> On 9/5/18 4:24 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
> >
>
> > So the newer UNIXes are in the clear. I doubt anyone actually cares about
> > version 0 either, but technically it's still under copyright.
>
> http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise17.html
>
> I don't think that is true since it predates the 1976 removal of the
> requirement
> for computer programs having to be registered with the Copyright office, and
> we know Unix didn't even have WE copyrights on the code until much later.
>
> Anything he created as replacements are, though.
>
> Hopefully, those are appropriately licensed.
>
> Anything before and including V7 is covered by the Ancient UNIX license.
Note that copyright and license are two separate topics.
A license is a grant of permission to do specific things with an item of
property (such as a copyrighted work).
If Unix V0 is in the public domain for the reasons Al mentioned (published
without copyright notice prior to 1 Jan 1978) then you can do with it what you
want, and the license is not relevant (since it isn't anyone's property). If
that code is *not* in the public domain for some reason, then a license from
its owners would come into play.
paul
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
