Allen Brown, CEO of The Open Group, explains that his organization owns the Unix trademark and that SCO Group holds the rights only to the OS source code.
Who Really Owns UNIX?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
despite splitting in half and starting to sink, that ghost ship once called “UNIX” is still going, floating on, and ramming several smaller vessels in her path…
thanks SCO and the open group
…how long it is before the UNIX copyright dies a slow horrible death and can finally be laid to rest? It can’t happen soon enough for me. Until then, seeing SCO stock price hit the gutter will have to suffice I suppose.
…how long it is before the UNIX copyright dies a slow horrible death and can finally be laid to rest?
Probably never, given regular votes in the USA, and the pressure to adopt the same laws in Europe and the rest of the world!
I’d much rather they focused on finding a way to make their standards relevant to vendors and customers than trying to breath life into a trademark of generic and dwindling importance.
You hit the nail on the head…what does “UNIX” really mean any more anyway?
POSIX has considerably more relevance than UNIX98 in actuality, and Linux is becoming a de-facto standard as nearly all the major UNIX houses are introducing Linux compatibility into their systems
I think the open group owns the _trademark_!
http://www.opengroup.org says:
“The Open Group has owned the registered trademark UNIX since 1994.”
I think the open group owns the _trademark_!
http://www.opengroup.org says:
“The Open Group has owned the registered trademark UNIX since 1994.”
I dont’ mind why Apple is even bothering with this ..obviously the unix thing is way overblown. No doubt, Unix was a great invention in its day, but besides innovative litigation, not much have happened in terms way of innovation in the recent past. All we have left now is a couple of lazy old men living in past glory and fighting hard to reap eternal profits from work that someone once did. In the process, they are all shooting themselves in the foot, as they did in the 70s and 80s, proving once again that the Unix people are unteachable. I can just imagine MS making a convincing sales pitch out of this. Thanks, SCO and Openwhaterver-you–are called.
I agree: since 1970 Unix has become a generic term and certainly the Unix source code has lost its relevance by now. I guess we´ll just have to weather this wave of litigation and hope that the people clinging to Unix I.P. will let go at some point.
There is nothing wrong with what the OpenGroup is doing whatsoever. This is nothing like the SCO lawsuit. Apple is using the Unix trademark without having gone through the extensive testing required to do so. If the OpenGroup doesn’t take legal action to protect that trademark, they will lose it. The same thing would happen if someone came out with a new operating system and sold it as “Linux”. If Linus Torvalds didn’t take any legal action, he would lose the trademark. It’s standard business.
:))))))
))))
What a zoo are we living in?
Is it true that all the UNIX derivatives are just rehashes of some base source that they all must pay to license? If this is true, than I doubt their is much difference between the various Unices like HP-UX etc… They’re just licensed to use source code. This whole SCO incident has pointed out this whole “lack of diveristy” in the licensed UNIX’s world.
Lawyers are making a bundle and have caught onto this whole tech mash of “proprietary” thought.
Now we don’t have to wait for the next OJ or Laci Peterson trial, the lawyers will just find who “owns” what and get them to SUE so they can make a huge buck.
Vic
http://lwn.net/Comments/36053/
It’s about time to reexamine the recent claims of The SCO group and call in the lawyers and maybe the authorities.
Unless I’m mistaken, and I might be, Apple is THE_ONLY_COMPANY bragging about Unix. They’ve spent there marketing money letting th “general public” in on the whole UNIX thing.
Whether or not they have the love of the Open Group or not, they have million of Mac users who now actually know what UNIX is.
Drop the suit morons. Unless you’re going to be personally getting some dividend from this, it’s stupid.
Vic
Is it true that all the UNIX derivatives are just rehashes of some base source that they all must pay to license? If this is true, than I doubt their is much difference between the various Unices like HP-UX etc… They’re just licensed to use source code. This whole SCO incident has pointed out this whole “lack of diveristy” in the licensed UNIX’s world.
Actually, the UNIX specification doesn’t care at all what the source code is, it just cares about operability. You could clean room implement your own OS, and as long as it meets all the UNIX98 operating specifications, it will be UNIX.
The self destructiveness of the non-MS end of the industry is readily apparant. How unfortunate.
If UNIX is really of dwindling importance, then why does Apple have the name plastered all over its OS X page? The make more references to UNIX than they do to Quartz, Rendezvous, or Sherlock. Obviously, UNIX still means something. It still stands for solidity, stability, and tight security. When Windows 2003 came out, what did everyone say? They said how Win2k3 was finally catching up to UNIX in terms of stability and security. So obviously, the UNIX name still has value, and as long as it has value, it doesn’t matter how widely used it is, it is still eligible for trademark protection.
oh, i can tell you that UNIX systems have a stronghold in market areas where solidity, stability, and tight security are not just empty words, but highly important requirements.
I work in the telecom sector and when choosing os for our 3G platform windows was actually considered at an early stage by managers, but soon droped due to the fact that it does not stand for solidity, stability, and tight security!! And when we now consider other os’s than SUN/Solaris, windows is not an option but linux and BSD is.
It’s not that Unix doesn’t stand for anything it’s that nobody can agree on what it does stand for
If Apple merely wants some geeky glitter around their OSX PR then why not s/Unix/BSD 🙂 Steve wearing Beastie horns and all…
It’s time for SCO to change its company name again.
SCO UNIX Enterprise or SUE
))
Other commentors have pointed out that the Open Group will lose their trademark if they fail to defend it in court, and that they’re therefore entitled to sue Apple for infringement. Good point, and true.
Nevertheless it’s about time the UNIX trademark cease to exist. I read a comment earlier comparing this dispute to Coca-Cola defending itself against generic cokes. In fact it has never had to do this – rather, it competes against other colas. The terms Coke and Coca-Cola themselves have remained trademarked because there is a generic term to describe colas in general. Not so with UNIX. If you want an analogy, Asprin would be a far better comparison than Coke. Asprin lost its trademark because the word fell into common use; back then, Kodak wanted you to take a Kodak instead of a photo and Jello was trying to distance itself from the word gelatin in order to make their name a household word. After Asprin lost its trademark the advertising world changed, which is why Q-Tips are specifically marketed as a brand of cotton swabs.
UNIX should become a common-use word, just as Asprin did. Consider: There are three major BSD operating systems directly derived from UNIX. The GNU system and Linux derive their basic operating models from UNIX. And conversely, trademark-UNIX users utilize many BSD and GNU utilities in their Open Group-approved UNIX systems. So much cross-pollenation has occurred that the term UNIX really has become generic.
I hold no grudge against the Open Group in this matter, but I’m rooting for Apple all the way.
SCO: All your source are belong to us!
Using Unix = Solaris – (IBM + SCO). This is specially for u Allen Brown.
Apple may need to say that OSX is Eunuch like from now on to avoid litigation.
I’m not so sure it was such as stupid move to sue. After all, it may be a latch ditch effort to save commercial UNIX. Even SUN is starting to feel the heat.
I’m also not entirely sure they should lose. After all, its very possible there is code in Linux that infringes on SCO’s rights. Yes, Torvalds built Linux from scracth, but I am also sure that considering the University he attended, he had access to the UNIX source code. I can gurantee you that he had access to the BSD source code. And remember that this was a time when the BSD source code was in dispute (They were getting sued by AT&T and then later Novel after AT&T dumped UNIX). Well, Novel and BSD settled out of court. But the agreement that was reached does NOT protect Linux. Now considering that many of the Linux utlities are ports of the original BSD utilities, I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some code in Linux that infringes.
If you really want to know who owns Unix/SCO try this link –
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/12338.html –
It’s old but accurate I think. Then Google on Ray Noorda or the Canopy Group.
http://68.115.1.105:8081/