Apple somehow "adjusting" to SCO case?

Jump to First Reply
bnoyhtuawbbnoyhtuawb
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
I seem to rember that all over the Apple site, there was this metal plate that said: "Based on UNIX".

Now it seems to have disappeared. Could that be Apple fearing that SCO claims that UNIX is their trademark?



Apple does not have to fear being sued because Max OS X' underpinnings (Darwin) stem from the BSD tree. So nothing to fear there, but UNIX actually belongs to SCO (not even BSD distribution have the right to call themselves "UNIX"), which could be a base to sue for wrongfully using a trademrk (just like TIBCO did).



If someone still finds this plate, please post the URL where!







Title meant to say SCO, sorry! Maybe a mod could ...

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    The Unix name is owned by The Open Group and they are sueing Apple - not SCO.





    Quote:

    Apple does not have to fear being sued because Max OS X' underpinnings (Darwin) stem from the BSD tree.



    What's funny is that the little bits that SCO has shown actually seem to come from BSD originally - it's not SCO's code
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 14
    bnoyhtuawbbnoyhtuawb Posts: 456member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JLL

    The Unix name is owned by The Open Group and they are sueing Apple - not SCO.





    Where did you get this information?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 14
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BNOYHTUAWB

    Where did you get this information?



    http://www.macnn.com/news/19728
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 14
    revsrevs Posts: 93member
    hmm well the UNIX pages still seem to be there...



    http://www.apple.com/macosx/jaguar/unix.html



    revs
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 14
    bnoyhtuawbbnoyhtuawb Posts: 456member
    This is what I meant. This sign used to be on display in way more locations!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 14
    1337_5l4xx0r1337_5l4xx0r Posts: 1,558member
    Quote:

    What's funny is that the little bits that SCO has shown actually seem to come from BSD originally - it's not SCO's code



    The ironic thing is that the one stipulation of using that BSD code is that you must preserve the copyright info... which SCO has removed (as evident from their slides). This means SCO has violated their terms of use of BSD code.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 14
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    The "Open Group" is almost on as much crack as SCO. But not quite. It says UNIX BASED not IT IS UNIX so they have no case and Apple should ignore them and let a judge throw it out of court. Just like what a judge will do to SCO.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 14
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    "UNIX based" doesn't get Apple off the hook because it explicitly identifies the basis of OS X as a "UNIX" when Apple hasn't jumped through the hoops and paid the big $$$ to be POSIX certified (which is required of any OS that wants to use the UNIX trademark).



    "UNIX compatible" or "UNIX like", on the other hand, are safer because they state that the product is not a UNIX.



    As a result, Apple's tactic in this lawsuit is to claim that "UNIX" has become sufficiently generic that it's no longer enforceable as a trademark - the same thing that just happened to "Windows," by the way. If Apple's successful, Open Group will lose one of their most valuable pieces of intellectual property, but at least they can fall back on "POSIX".



    (Personally, I wouldn't weep if Open Group lost.)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 14
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Why wouldn't Apple just go for POSIX compliance? Cost issue (a la Display Postscript)?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 14
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Cost, mostly, and not just the cost of the license (which runs comfortably into the hundreds of thousands of dollars). POSIX certification means that you have implemented a whole set of interfaces defined by a large set of standards, and you've run your implementation through a series of tests, and it passed. This means that Apple would have to spend time and talent combing through the POSIX documents (which are a maddening combination of nitpicky and vague), doing lots of grunt work to get all the nooks and crannies, forking out money for the testing, and then forking out money for the license to use the trademark.



    This is one reason why no "true" UNIX is anything like cheap. So instead, like BSD, Apple goes for "mostly POSIX compatible," which means that they're about 99% there, but they haven't (and odds are they won't) go through the trouble of getting tested and certified.



    The flip side, however, is that getting POSIX certified would give them instant enterprise cred. On the other hand, BSD and the BSD-based [NeXT|Open]Step weren't POSIX, and they've been accepted at the enterprise level. I'm unaware of any Linux distro that's certified, for obvious reasons, and it's gaining cred as well. So Apple might be jumping on the erosion of the meaningfulness of POSIX as a definition of UNIX - and that definition is the foundation upon which Open Group rests.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 14
    1337_5l4xx0r1337_5l4xx0r Posts: 1,558member
    BTW, I don't think the Open Group are being unreasonable. They haven't certified OSX as Unix, so it's not fair to call it Unix. Unix-like, Unix-esque, "Unixy", but not Unix.



    Edit: I also wouldn't rule out Apple certifying OSX as Posix compliant. If they plan on going enterprise, it might be a wise decision. Then Apple can tout OSX as Unix once again, developers have a truly POSIX OS, Open Group gets paid, everyone is happy.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 12 of 14
    catalystcatalyst Posts: 226member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R

    Edit: I also wouldn't rule out Apple certifying OSX as Posix compliant. If they plan on going enterprise, it might be a wise decision. Then Apple can tout OSX as Unix once again, developers have a truly POSIX OS, Open Group gets paid, everyone is happy.



    I don't think you'll be happy, cos you'll probably be paying for the certification in some way or another.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 14
    1337_5l4xx0r1337_5l4xx0r Posts: 1,558member
    Well, it's a lump sum (?) and Apple sells hundreds of thousands of machines per year, so...



    It's in Apple's best interests, IMHO, especially if they care to break into the enterprise.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 of 14
    andrewmandrewm Posts: 50member
    I've always liked Unix, but never want to be one...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.