yacc: public domain?

[Henry Spencer]

> ... Does U of Toronto require literally *every* student who has ever taken a
> Unix course or had a Unix signon to sign a nondisclosure?  If so, you are the
> exception, not the rule.

U of T definitely doesn't go this far; certainly my installation doesn't.
Thing is, if it comes to a legal battle, we are clearly in the wrong for
not taking action on the matter.  Note that the AT&T software licences
explicitly demand that users be informed of their non-disclosure
obligations; I can think of no possible defence for ignoring this part
of the licence.  Whether or not certain items of the software really are
protected any more, a signed licence that says you agree to tell your
users about the issue is hard to argue with.

> ... there are also public access
> Unixes.  I know of installations in Chicago and San Francisco.  Both have
> 'guest' logins, and will grant a login to anyone who asks, as well.  ...

I hope they have good lawyers.  If AT&T ever gets tough with them, they
are in big trouble.

> I can also point out at least several cases of Unix systems which are on
> dialup phone lines accessible to any "cracker," and which have guest logins
> with no password.  Several 68000 companies, for example, provide "demo"
> phone numbers with guest logins.  (In fact, I have seen systems that don't
> even have a root password!).

Same comment:  I hope they have good lawyers.  We got rid of our "guest"
account as soon as we thought about this for a moment.  The combination
of (a) dialups, (b) a no-password account, and (c) access to AT&T material
strikes me as an open-and-shut case.

> My point is that, although technically you are right (all of these people are
> guilty of violating the nondisclosure agreement), legally AT&T has no
> recourse against these people.  ...

Mmm, really?  Stipulating that AT&T has technically forfeited trade-secret
protection by not being careful enough, that still leaves that nasty little
licence that your institution signed.  Absence of trade-secret protection
would mean that the things are available for general use, but I strongly
suspect that a signed agreement remains a signed agreement, and deliberate
violation of it remains grounds for a lawsuit.  Certain clauses of the
agreement would become pointless, but that does not necessarily make them
null and void.  This is the sort of thing lawyers get rich on.

> ... all of the people responsible for letting
> the cat out of the bag are liable for damages to AT&T.  However, anyone who
> learned these secrets *from* those people can use them at will. ...

You're sure about that?  My impression was that the necessary condition
for use at will was that they acquired the secrets "in good faith", i.e.
not realizing that they were secrets.  Convincing a court that you didn't
realize the Unix kernel was a secret strikes me as hard; if you know
enough to know what it is, you are very likely to know its status.

> This is true.  As Ed Gould pointed out, no wise person is going to volunteer
> to be a test case.  But AT&T is in a bit of a bind here.  If they don't fight
> AND WIN a test case pretty soon, the thing is going to be so open and shut
> that even you and I could afford to fight them off.

Speak for yourself!  *NO* legal fight against AT&T is open and shut if
they are seriously interested in winning.  In an ideal world, a simple
case where the evidence was clear could be won easily and cheaply, even
against a huge opponent.  This is not an ideal world.  We are talking
about undermining the proprietary nature of Unix itself, the keystone
of AT&T's assault on the software market.  (The arguments that would
apply to the binaries today could be applied to the sources tomorrow.)
I would expect the legal warfare to last a decade and cost millions.
I would also refuse to put any large bets on the outcome, regardless
of how obvious the rights and wrongs are.

P.S.:  Like Geoff, I am not a lawyer.  Consult an expert before doing
	anything rash.
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry