[Info-vax] [Attn: HP Employees] PDP-11 OS hobbyist licensing

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <l2k6so$dqf$1 at dont-email.me>,
	Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
> On 2013-10-03, Bill Gunshannon <bill at server3.cs.scranton.edu> wrote:
>> In article <l2jmbe$8pc$3 at dont-email.me>,
>> 	Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>> On 2013-10-03, Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what the legal situation is with Bitsavers which archives not
>>>> only the public documentation, but also the binary OS kits as well.
>>>>
>>>> If you look, you will see they have versions of RSX not covered by
>>>> the Mentec license. As for me, I would like to play with the kits
>>>                                                               ^
>>> 
>>> Insert "authorised by the Mentec hobbyist licence" after "kits" here.
>>> You won't find me touching any version not covered by the Mentec licence.
>>
>> And you have the DEC Emultor clearly spelled out in that same Mentec
>> License?
>>
> 
> [snip patronising response]
> 
> Next time Bill, you might want to read the whole of my response before
> sounding off.

I did.  You said "Insert "authorised by the Mentec hobbyist licence"".
Without the EMULATOR as spelled out in the infamous Mentec License there
are no kits "authorised by the Mentec hobbyist licence".  


> 
>>
>>> 
>>>> and there's nothing at a technical level stopping me, but morally
>>>> I just don't feel it's right until after the licence issue is resolved.
>>>>
> 

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>