> 
> J.T. Conklin writes:
> 
> >If I remember correctly, the AT&T "true" was just a big copyright
> >notice, and "false" was a big copyright notice followed by "exit 255".
> >So, there should be no problem wrt. copyright infringment if our true
> >implementation was "exit 0" and our false implementation was "exit 1".
> 
> Actually, the original /bin/true was a zero length executable file.  I
> fail to see how anyone could claim a copyright on nothing.

In the legal world one can claim anything one wishes, the expense comes
in makeing it hold water in court :-(.  Infact AT&T could claim copyright
to the notice itself other than the one line Copyright date, who, place
line.

From my recollection of the former discussion with respect to this, and
how it has been implemented I see no real possiblity of a ``winnable''
copyright suite, but even if they lost it would pretty much wipe out
NetBSD finacially (or the individual they went after if they did).

Remeber the likes of AT&T, USL, and Novell have big deap pockets and
staffs of lawers who really know the game.  They do not care about
winning or losing in court, that is not the bottom line, it is whipping
out the competition any way they can.

Just FYI, from some one who has played a little to much in the legal
games of copyright, and patent infringement with the big legal begals... :-(.

-- 
Rod Grimes                                      rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com
Accurate Automation Company                   Custom computers for FreeBSD

------------------------------------------------------------------------------