[Info-vax] RSX-11, was: Re: Comment on the future of OpenVMS

[P. Sture]

In article <hcuj9r$d30$1 at news.eternal-september.org>,
 Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:

> On 2009-11-04, BillPedersen <pedersen at ccsscorp.com> wrote:
> >
> > The Mentec licensing issue is still in negotiation from information I
> > have been able to obtain recently.  These licenses have NOT entered
> > the public domain.  I can provide information to people who might be
> > interested in commercial licenses on an interim basis as negotiations
> > continue as to the final disposition of the intellectual property.
> >
> 
> Thanks for the update; it's interesting to learn that final disposition
> talks are actively in progress.
> 

Agreed it's good to see it's not being left to rot, although I must add 
that one product I used to work with ended up being owned by an 
organisation which treated it as a cash cow. Originally developed using 
funds from Esprit (or an earlier one I forget, but ISTR EEC funds were 
involved), the licensing rights weren't owned by the company that 
developed it, which led to pain later since the developers weren't free 
to drop its price to meet market conditions.

-- 
Paul Sture