Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Sued Over Unix Trademark

simoniker posted more than 11 years ago | from the god-sued-over-apple-trademark dept.

Unix 881

Jerrry writes "CNET News reports The Open Group is suing Apple over unlicensed use of the Unix trademark, after Apple used the term in conjunction with its Mac OS X marketing. Apple, meanwhile, is countersuing to have the Unix trademark declared invalid because the term has become generic."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

shock and awe (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176413)

hepkitten [livejournal.com] takes it deep in the ass goatse [goatse.cx] -style

If you're not jacking it to fat mommy-bellied twentysomethings who had a kid at the age of sixteen, wrote a web browser before mosaic was a twinkle in the internet's eye while writing important mathematical and physical papers then this skanky slut is the one for you!

check her out on #insub on EFNet and maybe if you paypal her you'll be jerking like a king tonight!

1309!!!

Wow silly! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176414)

Why dont we all just sue someone eelse for some random stupid idea....

oh wait.... corperate america though of that first!

Re:Wow silly! (1)

Uber Banker (655221) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176478)

I ate an Apple 'Apple Corp' was dreamt up!

Why don't i sue Apple for infringement of me being able to make a computational device from apples. In what was does 'Apple' resemble an aple in functionality. On behalf of COXs everywhere, I will Sue Apple for the COX abacus.

Re:Wow silly! (1)

Uber Banker (655221) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176503)

Who is Sue?

pirst fost (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176415)

I FAIL IT HAPPY PANTS

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176416)

could it be

fp (-1, Troll)

axehat (590580) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176417)

In Soviet Russia, I get first post.

Re:fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176430)

But not on slashdot.

Whoohoo! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176424)

I love my Windows XP.

Lindows Suing Windows trademark (2)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176524)

Is not Winows a generic term, not only for panes of glass, but also generic in the computer sense as well. Lindows thinks so and has a suit against MS.

business model (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176425)

1. Sue people
2. ???
3. PANTS!

OMFG!!! ( :saw Re:business model) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176462)

I JUST SHIT YOUR PANTS!!!

Go, go, Apple, go! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176429)

Unix has become a generic term. Removing trademark status would benefit not only Apple, but the free Unixes, Linux and the BSDs.

Re:Go, go, Apple, go! (5, Interesting)

Aneurysm (680045) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176477)

This is true. The underlying technology should be taken into account, rather than just the name used to describe it. Unix is a generic term now, and trying to sue people over a name that describes a large and diverse base of technology is just silly.

Re:Go, go, Apple, go! (3, Funny)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176486)

Unix has become a generic term. Removing trademark status would benefit not only Apple, but the free Unixes, Linux and the BSDs.

But it would severely hurt the GNU movement. ["it's not unix? Why isn't it unix? Does that mean it isn't free software?"]

"GNU/Unix" has a nice ring to it (2, Funny)

EccentricAnomaly (451326) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176535)

I never liked "GNU/Linux"... it's sounds kinda hokey... but "GNU/Unix" has a nice ring to it...

You get everything, Unix and Not-Unix all rolled together :)

Re:"GNU/Unix" has a nice ring to it (5, Funny)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176568)

GNU's Not Unix...except on alternate tuesdays.

I think I need an ibuprofen now!

Go Apple! (1)

mossmann (25539) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176431)

It has definitely become a generic term. I'd like to see the courts support Apple so that we can all use "Unix" without fear.

Re:Go Apple! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176490)

i agree! i'm a consultant and change jobs quite often (6 - 9 months) since most of the time i work on small web development projects. the whole LAPP things (Linux Apache PHP Postgres) - and guess what; nobody ever really says "we're developing using Linux", they say "we're UNIX based." It's either "Windows" meaning Windows 2000 (sometimes XP) or "UNIX", usually meaning Red Hat.

Go Apple, even though I prefer to build my own pcs and run Debian. (I know I'm rambling. I'm at work bored till 9, inflating my income ;)

In other News... (4, Funny)

Davak (526912) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176433)

Yes, in other news the FGA (Fruit Growers of America) is filing suit against Apple.

"Apple" is pretty damn generic term... get off soapbox!

Davak

Re:In other News... (4, Informative)

Surak (18578) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176476)

I agree. FreeBSD is *genetic* Unix, and that is the sense in which Apple is using the term Unix. I don't think Apple is trying to claim that OS X is a certified Unix.

OS X is based on FreeBSD, which is genetic Unix, hence OS X is also genetic Unix.

Re:In other News... (0, Troll)

feldy (71897) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176501)

FreeBSD is *genetic* Unix
FreeBSD, which is genetic Unix
OS X is also genetic Unix

I know the 't' key is right next to the 'r' key, but c'mon... three times in one post?

Re:In other News... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176529)

HE is a TROLL, dont feed him.

Re:In other News... (1)

terrymr (316118) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176538)

yes genetic as in descended from the original unix.

Re:In other News... (2, Informative)

Surak (18578) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176556)

I borrowed the term "genetic Unix" (that was not I typo -- I did not mean "generic Unix") from ESR, which he coined in the OSI Position Paper on the SCO-vs-IBM Complaint [opensource.org] .

Re:In other News... (4, Interesting)

Surak (18578) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176510)

In fact, I don't see Open Group suing FreeBSD [freebsd.org] over *their* use of the UNIX trademark, right on their front page!

Re:In other News... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176561)

That's because FreeBSD is dying. Those who still use FreeBSD are penniless hippies who cannot afford more advanced (Apple) hardware.

Apple has money, therefore they are more sue-worthy.

Re:In other News... (5, Informative)

sultanoslack (320583) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176504)

Trademarks are registered for different categories of trade. i.e. I can trademark Apple as a new type of car and this is just fine. I could also create a new fruit drink called Unix or a toilet papaer brand called SCO with no trademark problems.

Re:In other News... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176539)

Oh, please create the toilet paper.

SCO wouldn't like that (5, Funny)

eddy (18759) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176545)

a toilet papaer brand called SCO with no trademark problems.

Actually, that's reserved for Authentic SCO Stock(TM)

Re:In other News... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176519)

>"Apple" is pretty damn generic term... get off soapbox!

Who is Apple suing for using Apples trademark then?

Re:In other News... (1)

proclus (33875) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176536)

Funny, I thought the fruit growers were suing Apple!

Re:In other News... (1)

GMontag (42283) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176553)

Maybe Apple Records (the Beatles) can dust off their threatened lawsuit against Apple (that was settled with licensing IIRC)?

Unix...? (-1)

Fecal Troll Matter (445929) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176434)

Medical marijuana can make things fabulous, medically.

Apple should pay up. (4, Interesting)

Sebby (238625) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176435)

As much as an Apple fan I am, I think they should pay up; a license is a license, and the Open Group clearly have a trademark of 'Unix'.

After all, Apple has trademarks of their own, how would they like it if MS or some other company started using them without a license?

Re:Apple should pay up. (5, Insightful)

naitro (680425) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176482)

The problem isn't really the price, but rather the fact that MacOS X doesn't follow the given standards describing what framework a Unix is supposed to be based on. Take the directory tree as an example.

Thus, even if Apple did want to buy a license, they probably couldn't.

Re:Apple should pay up. (2, Insightful)

Sebby (238625) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176573)

Correct.

Also, by their own statement:
""Apple accurately uses the generic term Unix merely to identify or describe an aspect or feature of Apple's Mac OS X operating system. This is consistent with past and current industry standards."


I didn't know ignoring trademarks was now 'industry standard'

I'll go make a computer of my own and call it 'AppleMac'

Re:Apple should pay up. (4, Informative)

jest3r (458429) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176527)

Definately. They are sending money Amazon's way for 1 click shopping which is questionable at best ..
As per the following link Apple is clearly using the UNIX trademark to their advantage to SELL their product.

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

Are Apple's trademarks generic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176567)

As much as an Apple fan I am, I think they should pay up; a license is a license, and the Open Group clearly have a trademark of 'Unix'.

After all, Apple has trademarks of their own, how would they like it if MS or some other company started using them without a license?


If they are generic, please list those Apple trademarks that are generic.

If they are not generic, have a nice, warm cup of STFU.

P.S. Apple is not a generic term in the software/computer industry, so that doesn't count.

Re:Apple should pay up. (4, Informative)

mrpuffypants (444598) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176569)

Apple, if anybody, knows about trademarked terms:

1) Apple Corps. and the lawsuit with the Beatles publishing company over the music biz thing. This could rear its head back up in coming months because of iTMS

2) Firewire. Apple MADE firewire, but because they refused to let anybody use firewire as the name of the device all these odd names like IEEE1394, i.Link, and others crowded the market. Later on Apple wised up and said that Firewire was so generic now that anybody can use it to describe IEEE1394 devices.

Wow, Kettle meet Pot, Apple (4, Interesting)

puto (533470) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176436)

You know I love Apple as much as the next guy in many respects, although not one of the fanatics who have fallen into the apple marketing hype or a part of the cult(As I love my windows 2000 box as well) and Linux. Well, I love computers.

Anyway, Apple is getting a little taste of it's own medicine. Didn't they sue somone over them copying, or making a similar color scheme on a pc case?

And haven't they sued before for things just a frivilous. Apple is fanatic about protecting their ip.

But maybe they are wrong here.

Puto

Re:Wow, Kettle meet Pot, Apple (4, Insightful)

EggMan2000 (308859) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176494)

They have also "threatened" to sue mfg'rs of toasters, PC accessories, and other computer mfg'rs for using pastel and bright color schemes on their products.

They really work to protect their brand more than anything else. I saw a cease and desist they sent to wincustomize.com for somebody emulating the OSX desktop look and feel on a PC.

Protecting IP is one thing, but Apple is tops when it comes to protecting their brand.

Personally, I think Apple is in the wrong here. I have seen some of these ads for OSX that basically say "It's just like UNIX" -I mean come-on, at least put a bullet next to the word or something.

Re:Wow, Kettle meet Pot, Apple (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176495)

And haven't they sued before for things just a frivilous.

Apple, like any major corporation has a long history of such legal actions. Pineapple Computers (an Apple II clone). Apple Records suing Apple Computers. Etc.

I think that if you look at IBM, Microsoft, Intel etc. they all have a long history of this sort of stuff.

Re:Wow, Kettle meet Pot, Apple (1)

Ann Coulter (614889) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176514)

Do you mean the Look and Feel case [freebsd.org] that Apple lost?

Re:Wow, Kettle meet Pot, Apple (1)

rekkanoryo (676146) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176530)

I agree with you on this issue; it is something of the pot calling the kettle black. However, the term "UNIX" has become very generic, referring quite commonly to an entire class of operating systems. In this case, I think the scales should be slightly tilted toward Apple.

Did the check bounce? (5, Interesting)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176437)

I thought that apple paid the Open Group to certify themselves as a Unix, around the time that OS X came out.

What am I missing here?

New slogan (0)

exspecto (513607) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176438)

New Apple Slogan:

"Think Sued..."

Hi, I'm from SCO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176521)

You're using our trademarked slogan.
Plz buy us out now. thnx! :-D

You just have to laugh (4, Interesting)

crmartin (98227) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176439)

... because if you took this stuff any more seriously, you'd have to cry.

SCO suing IBM
Open Group suing Apple
Apple suing Open Group

It's starting to sound like a game of "Six Degrees".

Re:You just have to laugh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176456)

Yeah, exactly like a game of Six Degrees, except nobody's connected.

Re:You just have to laugh (1)

crmartin (98227) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176496)

Okay, AIX is a UNIX because IBM got it certified against SvR4; OpenGroup has the UNIX trademark because AT&T sold it to Novell (UnixWare) which gave it to OpenGroup; SCO has the UnixWare code base because they bought it(+/- copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and customized mouse pads) from Novell; and SCO is suing IBM about AIX.

Feel better now?

KB (5, Funny)

sbszine (633428) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176488)

Now if IBM would just sue Kevin Bacon, you'd really have something there...

how can people fucking reply before the article... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176443)

... is available on the site?

i just clicked on this shitty apple sux sco sux, unix sux most article, and it came up with 404?

and now that is available it immediately has 5 replies already!

fuck slashdot

-------

anyways, here is the deal:

time to sue the whole world, maybe it will get a better place after everybody fights everone else and their borthers

jeez, and i thought the open group had some higher values and beliefs =)

oh i forgot, its only apple. those traitors deserve it.

macos-sux? a unix u say?

no way. sue em to oblivion.

thank you.

MAC OSX is unix (5, Informative)

rkz (667993) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176447)

A/UX was Apple's first try at a Unix operating system and was based on System V Release 2.2. But that wasn't where Apple stopped. They added custom extensions from Releases 3 and 4, and the networking and filesystem were from 4.2/4.3BSD. The GUI was System 7.0.1 (for A/UX 3.0.1, the version I use) and Apple's own version of the X Window System called MacX. I would say that this is Unix.

Another example (closer to Mac OS X) is NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP. This OS uses the Mach kernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University with major contributions from Avie Tevanian. This Kernel had no natural interface, so to stay with standards, BSD was used as an interface layer (specifically 4.3BSD was licensed to be used). For a GUI, NeXT developed their own application environment (that would one day become Cocoa) and used Adobe's Display Postscript as the display engine (which Apple would replace after Rhapsody with Quartz, which used Apple's Display PDF in place of Display Postscript). There was no version of X Windows shipped with NeXT systems, but a number of people made versions for NeXT systems (much like people are doing today for Mac OS X). I would say that this is Unix.

I, personally, have a hard time not considering anything that uses either System V or BSD to be Unix. These have been the pillars of this OS, and when not used have been the models for other operating systems. I would not consider POSIX to be a good way to judge a system as being Unix because Windows NT 4.0 was POSIX compliant and it is not Unix.

Re:MAC OSX is unix (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176467)

Shut up kike. You and your faggot teletype tags deeply deserve a seat in a German concentration camp. THINK DIFFERENT EVERYBODY

riiight (2)

gfody (514448) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176449)

Apple accurately uses the generic term Unix merely to identify or describe an aspect or feature of Apple's Mac OS X operating system.

what is it suppose to mean if I say I've added unix features to my operating system?

The IP Jungle that is Unix... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176453)

If the latest revalations regarding IBM's possible leakage of copyrighted Unix code into Linux have proven anything, it is that using any derivative of this outdated operating system is a legal disaster waiting to happen. Not only is Linux licensed under the anti-business GNU General Public License, but it turns out that commercial code may have been unlawfully added, making it illegal to use or distribute.

This should suprise no one familiar with the history of Unix. The earliest version was an unlicensed ripoff of the proprietary Multics operating system, and was partly responsible for destroying the market for this pioneering operating system. The Berkeley Shareware Distribution (BSD) was sued by AT&T in the early 1990s, for openly distributing copyrighted code in its public-domain source releases. As if this wasn't enough, it turned out that AT&T had also broken the license on code they had taken from BSD, leaving both sides forced to essentially accept the other's illegal behavior in order to avoid stiffer penalties.

Reputable software companies such as Microsoft, though initially interested in Unix, have learned to steer clear of the mess of standards, licenses, and conflicting intellectual property rights that Unix forms. Microsoft Windows XP [microsoft.com] is the latest release of Microsoft's flagship version of Windows, built from the ground up in the early 1990s based on the most modern concepts in operating systems, without any legacy baggage from the 1970s. And it is available essentially for free, preloaded on hardware from all major manufacturers. There is really no reason to use anything else, unless you need a truly high-performance computing system such as IBM's proprietary OS/390 or HP's OpenVMS.

Re:The IP Jungle that is Unix... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176499)

so what hes trying to say is.... linix sux!

fuck you fags!?

Re:The IP Jungle that is Unix... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176546)

The earliest version was an unlicensed ripoff of the proprietary Multics operating system, and was partly responsible for destroying the market for this pioneering operating system

"partly responsible"? A teeny part, then, because I didn't know there was ever any hardware back then capable of getting any usable speed out of Multics.

MOD TROLL DOWN. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176566)

thank you.

It's about time (4, Interesting)

Space Coyote (413320) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176454)

Apple, meanwhile, is countersuing to have the Unix trademark declared invalid because the term has become generic. Thank the great good lord someone with clout is finally going to push this position. Incidentally I've only ever seen Apple use the phrase 'Unix-based' or 'unix-like' in their advertising literature, but I haven't been exhaustive by any means. It's good to see them at least put up a good fight in the name of the greater good (i.e., stopping Unix snobs from weilding that particular sledgehammer against Linux) rather than just capitulating and signing a cheque, which they're certainly able to do.

IBM is too slow... (1)

madgeorge (632496) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176458)

What, no offer from IBM, so SCO is wooing another potential buyout?

Unbelievable.

Re:IBM is too slow... (1)

madgeorge (632496) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176526)

Ignore the previous ignorant ramblings. The Open Group != SCO. Well, inbred idiots, perhaps.

doesn't sound very "open" to me (2, Insightful)

Tancred (3904) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176461)

Suing over the name Unix doesn't sound very "open" to me. Guess they're trying to give SCO a run for the money in the bad PR department.

Re:doesn't sound very "open" to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176484)

phull AQ on this dude.

opengroup should be renamed to closed society.

muahahahaha

Old news (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176465)

This is old news, but interesting nevertheless.
Thing is, Apple has been using the "UNIX-Based" logo for Mac OS X, indeed. Without having pass certification by TheOpenGroup which is the people who own the UNIX trademark.

Suing.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176470)

In this case can we sue apple for vairous trademarks:

* UI Themes that are ASS
* The use of the word apple in context of:
- Being GAY
- Being SHIT
- apple.slashdot.org - cause someone here decided to make it look like ASS.
* For not going bankrupt 10 years ago.

And oh yea, Steve Jobs being more of an asshole than Larry Ellison and Bill Gates combined. Damn.

Next on /. (5, Funny)

Mr. Sketch (111112) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176471)

SCO sues Open Group for illegal suing over the Unix trademark.

Followed by:
SCO sues Mr. Sketch for using the term 'Unix' in a public discussion forum without their prior permissions.

Re:Next on /. (1)

Bull999999 (652264) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176523)

I patented the method of suing Mr. Sketch so I'll sue SCO next. And I will using my patent to sue Mr. Sketch for giving SCO incentive to sue Mr. Sketch and violating my patent.

Unix looks generic to me (4, Interesting)

eet23 (563082) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176472)

If you say "Unix" to me I don't think of the Open Group. I think of things like BSD, or (partially) MacOS X, and Linux is Unix-like.

If most people look on it that way, the trademark is probably generic.

If you say "Apple" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176571)

To me I think fruit.

OPEN Group? (3, Insightful)

LamerX (164968) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176473)

Guess they're not so Open about things after all?

Where do they come up with these names?

Re:OPEN Group? (4, Informative)

Otter (3800) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176557)

The use of the word "open" in the systems world (referring to standards-based systems, in contrast to heavily proprietary minicomputer systems like Prime and VMS) long predates "open source".

Eric Raymond doesn't own the word "open" any more than Richard Stallman has the right to go around insisting that people are using the word "free" incorrectly. Let them invent their own words.

110,000 (1)

BigBadBri (595126) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176474)

For fscks sake, all the Open Group want is a piddling $110K for using the trademark.

IMHO, it's better that Apple settles, thwn Open Group can take $110K out of SCO's legal fund, just to weaken the bastids further.

Good! (1)

CracktownHts (655507) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176480)

Because I hate it when my rich-boy Machead roommate says "and what about Windows XP? what's it based on?" As though he automatically has better hardware than me just because he can afford a G4 and all I have is this lousy Athlon.

Install Lunix on his Mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176559)

That'll fix him

This is ridiculous! (1)

Jerk City Troll (661616) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176481)

Apple, meanwhile, is countersuing to have the Unix trademark declared invalid because the term has become generic.

"Unix" has become just like "Xerox". I truly hope this is an open and shut win for Apple because this lawsuit is just plain bullshit. Everyone from magazines to manuals to all kinds of marketing material use the term "Unix" extensively. SysAdmin and ;login: immediately come to mind. I'm sure there's dozens of others. If this "trademark" hasn't been enforced in any other cases, how can they possibly stand a chance to win against Apple?

Enough with the frivilous lawsuits already!!

*nix (3, Insightful)

rfsayre (255559) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176483)

the use of "*nix" should pretty much prove their point.

I think i'll side with Apple (2, Funny)

qortra (591818) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176485)

I have no idea who the "Open Group" is, but it sounds like they pretend to support GNU/Linux. Suing for things like the name "Unix" however seems to me to be very much against the ideals of GNU and the FSF. I'd keep a close eye on this organization; they sound like posers.

Re:I think i'll side with Apple (1)

crmartin (98227) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176531)

You're right ... you don't have any idea who OpenGroup is. You should have stopped there, because the rest just makes you sound like a moron.

Re:I think i'll side with Apple (3, Informative)

demon (1039) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176562)

Sir, inform thyself. The Open Group has no relationship at all to Linux. In fact, at one point they were the proprietors of the X source code, and they were going to close that code, leaving only XFree86 to maintain an open X Window System codebase. (Thankfully, that didn't happen.) They're no special friends of the Linux or *BSD communities, suffice to say. They own the UNIX trademark, and they'll beat you bloody with it.

That said, I'm surprised I hadn't heard something about this earlier. I wondered many times when The Open Group [opengroup.org] was going to start in on Apple for calling OS X "UNIX", when they don't even let the free *BSD variants and Linux use the name.

As generic as they come (4, Insightful)

Faust7 (314817) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176491)

Apple has countersued, asking a judge to declare that the trademark is invalid, because the term Unix has become generic.

And it has. So many companies have been marketing and otherwise throwing around the name "UNIX" for so long now -- what do you think the chances are that The Open Group formally licensed their trademark to each and every one of them?

The timing and selection of this lawsuit reeks of convenience.

I bought an Apple (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176492)

And now I can't break myself of the homosexual lifestyle! All I wanted is a powerbook, and now I don't like women anymore!

Someone help me.

Re:I bought an Apple (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176532)

You think you have it bad, I bought an iBook that looks like a gay toilet lid and five minutes later I was gang raped in the back of Fry's by a pack of hunky, hung black guys.

Thank you Steve Jobs

Re:I bought an Apple (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176534)

apple - the power of the G(ay)

[bigapplerentboys.com]
http://www.bigapplerentboys.com/

check that shiat. it fits perfectly.

muahahah

Hoping the lawyers involved choke on their hot air (5, Funny)

Vicegrip (82853) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176500)

The day just isn't the same without a UNIX related lawsuit.... lately I've been thinking the medieval witch test (the water drowning one) could easily find itself a new vocation in detecting corrupt lawyers.

Dumb idea (1)

coolmacdude (640605) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176506)

These Unix patent/license holder companies' lawsuits are really getting annoying. Unix is about open standards, it seems to me that suing someone who makes a Unix product to get a bucketload of license money is just an attempt to reshape the Unix world into the same pattern as Microsoft's nightmarish licensing model.

hmm.... (0)

tytanic11 (614029) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176507)

UNIX UNIX my computer runs on a UNIX like OS, which is Linux - now sue me. I just used the UNIX trademark.

Why? (5, Informative)

n.wegner (613340) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176508)

According to their web pages, NetBSD and OpenBSD are "UNIX-like operating system[s]", and FreeBSD is "derived from BSD UNIX". Since parts of OSX are from FreeBSD, I could see why they can say Unix-based.

I commend them for taking it to court instead of settling, but surely they should have known that the *BSDs started because of these same issues with the Unix owners. I wonder why they stepped into this minefield.

Apropos UNIX quote... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176509)

(http://catb.org/~esr/writings/unix-koans/unix-nat ure.html)

Master Foo discourses on the Unix Nature

A student said to Master Foo: âoeWe are told that the firm called SCO holds true dominion over Unix.â

Master Foo nodded.

The student continued, âoeYet we are also told that the firm called OpenGroup also holds true dominion over Unix.â

Master Foo nodded.

âoeHow can this be?â asked the student.

Master Foo replied:

âoeSCO indeed has dominion over the code of Unix, but the code of Unix is not Unix. OpenGroup indeed has dominion over the name of Unix, but the name of Unix is not Unix.â

âoeWhat, then, is the Unix-nature?â asked the student.

Master Foo replied:

âoeNot code. Not name. Not mind. Not things. Always changing, yet never changing.â

âoeThe Unix-nature is simple and empty. Because it is simple and empty, it is more powerful than a typhoon.â

âoeMoving in accordance with the law of nature, it unfolds inexorably in the minds of programmers, assimilating designs to its own nature. All software that would compete with it must become like to it; empty, empty, profoundly empty, perfectly void, hail!.â

Upon hearing this, the student was enlightened.

I saw it coming (1)

Stonent1 (594886) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176511)

The first time I saw it on the OSX page a few years ago. I wondered how they could use it without licensing true Unix technology.

The anti-switch campaign (1)

jpmahala (181937) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176512)

This is pretty lame. I'm rather disgusted with the bickering, suing, counter-suing, and zealotry going on between both commercial and open-source *NIX organizations. It almost makes me want to switch back to Micro$oft from FreeBSD. ...almost.

(It's a shame BeOS isn't really on the map anymore. It didn't fall into the category of a *NIX.)

Unix is generic (4, Interesting)

NavelFozz (33778) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176516)

It has definitely become a generic term. I'd like to see the courts support Apple so that we can all use "Unix" without fear.
e a generic term. Removing trademark status would benefit not only Apple, but the free Unixes, Linux and the BSDs.
When was the last time that some company came out with Unix v9.0 or whatever?

Thing of it is... (1)

xombo (628858) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176517)

It also seems that there isn't a true UNIX anymore, it is just a term for anything that is text based and uses the same flow of commands in a command prompt, and is portable to other OS's. Didn't Microsoft claim that win2k was unix before too? How exactly do you define a UNIX OS today anyways? It is a VERY broad term indeed.

yeah but see how fast (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176520)

apple would sue you if you had an interface that was 'apple like'

OTOH a pear's interface is 'apple like'. heh

Making a stand (4, Interesting)

TrekkieGod (627867) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176525)

I'm not an apple fanatic. But I think this demonstrates the character of the company. From the article:

In any case, no company is required to pay more than $110,000, said Graham Bird, vice president of marketing for The Open Group.

You know the legal battle will cost much, much more than that...but instead of doing what makes economic sense, they're doing what's right, and taking the burden off the rest of us. Because you know that if the Open Group succeeds, they're probably going to start suing red-hat and other linux distros for explaining that linux is "unix based" in their FAQ.

UNIX: What's the first thing that comes to mind? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6176540)

When someone asks you about "UNIX," what's the first thing that comes to mind? BSD? A Class of Operating Systems? Linux? SCO? Sun? IBM? Apple? DOS?

I'll tell you what the answer is NOT: The OPEN GROUP. I don't even have a clue what they do. Most people have never heard of them, even most people who know what unix is.

Also, Apple is accurately describing their OS when they say it is Unix-Based.

The mark should be generic.

Where have I seen this before? (1)

Rolman (120909) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176542)

"Windows" is also a very generic term, and there you had Microsoft going after Lindows in the same way.

That case should provide enough precedence, although The Open Group may be doing this precisely to set precedence on the whole SCO fiasco. I smell something fishy about this.

Also, I'm a little confused on how can they say Apple used the trademark without a license. AFAIK Apple didn't use any source code from UNIX directly, they based Darwin from BSD, which in turn should have a clear relationship with the UNIX trademark, am I wrong?

Why not just get the certification? (1)

Crispy Critters (226798) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176544)

It shouldn't be that hard to get the OS certified as official Unix. The difference between a BSD and a legal Unix can't be that much. Many of the important parts may be hidden from the GUI, but that shouldn't matter.

If Apple does this, they can sell their OS as an actual Unix. This would seem to be great as an advertising angle. It is one thing to know that an Apple machine would make a good server because it is Unix-like underneath, but it would have a great impact if it could say Unix right on the box. People who need a new Unix server may start thinking of Apple first.

They have already switched over to a Unix-y system, so why not make the most of it?

Goal is to Maintain the Unix Standard (5, Informative)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 11 years ago | (#6176564)

The goal of the lawsuit is to maintain the Unix Standard. Not a bad thing. The Open Group owns the definition of Unix and the test suite, and of course the trademark. Things that don't certify to the standard can call themselves anything but "Unix". This sort of certification bound with a trademark is compatible with Open Source, and is a way that Open Source proponents have generally recommended that business people protect their brand and trademark.

Neither Linux nor the BSDs infringe upon this trademark, and of course the Open Group has made significant contributions to the Linux Standard Base (about 95% of the test-suite software, I'm told) and has been working on an Open Source Strategy with me since last year. You'll like it. It's in internal review now.

If you would like to send a message to the Open Group, I would not be a bad intermediary to use. Please write to me at bruce @ perens.com . I am on the road right now and will not be able to engage in a long debate on Slashdot, so email will be best.

Thanks

Bruce

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?