[Info-vax] Licenses on VAX/VMS 4.0/4.1 source code listing scans

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 12/10/21 4:50 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 12/10/2021 2:23 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2021-12-10, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/10/2021 1:25 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> On 2021-12-10, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Case in point.  We at Consolidated Data insist that all our 
>>>>> customers have
>>>>> support for their commercial use VMS systems.  That is our ethics.  
>>>>> However,
>>>>> should the time come when there is nobody to pay for such support, 
>>>>> and the
>>>>> license terminates, and VMS stops working, then I will bypass the 
>>>>> licensing to
>>>>> keep my customer in business.  That is my ethics.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Even ignoring the legal issues with that (and you know my position in
>>>> this general area :-)), do you have the knowledge needed to actually
>>>> do this bypass ?
>>>>
>>>> If you don't, where do you intend on getting this knowledge from ?
>>>
>>> I'll defer answering that question, for now.
>>>
>>
>> So are you saying you don't actually have the knowledge needed to create
>> the patch needed to bypass the LMF ?
> 
> I'm just not saying ...
> 
>>> Instead, I'll ask these questions.
>>>
>>> What is the problem, if there is nobody to question such usage?
>>>
>>
>> Ownership of assets doesn't cease just because a company fails.
>>
>> You are setting yourself and your customers up for a future owner
>> of the VSI assets to come after you, especially if you reduce the
>> resale value of those assets by coming up with a way to bypass the
>> need for existing VMS customers to purchase more of those assets.
> 
> If there is an entity that allows my customers to continue, then there 
> isn't an issue, is there?
> 
> If there is not an entity, who, other than you and Bill, is going to 
> really give a damn?

The owner of the IP might.  And their lawyers might see violators as
low hanging fruit to recover some of their losses.  :-)

> 
>>> What is your opinion of a vendor potentially destroying a customer's 
>>> business?
>>>
>>
>> You know what VSI have done by putting time limits on production
>> licences and you could port away today if the risk is unacceptable
>> to you.
> 
> Porting is not an option.

Porting is always an option.  There is nothing done on a computer
that can not be done on another computer.  You may think the work
required is excessive and you  might think the cost is excessive
but that doesn't mean it can not be done.

> 
>> That is your legal option to remove this risk.
>>
>> Why do you think so many people are angry with VSI for introducing
>> time-limited production licences instead of just saying that they
>> will patch VMS to bypass the licences if VSI fails ?
>>
>> They clearly understand the legal issues and risks involved with trying
>> to do what you suggest.
> 
> Ok Simon, I'll turn things around.  If you had customers depending on 
> VMS, or any software, and the vendor went away, and your customers 
> needed to continue to use their applications, what would you do?  Would 
> you do whatever was necessary for your customers to continue, or, would 
> you tell your customers "too bad, you lose"?

A wise man wouldn't wait until the drop dead date to fix a problem.
The customers complaint would not be with you, necessarily, it would
be with the owners of VMS or that other software that just went away.
But, no company I know of has just dropped dead all of a sudden.
There are always warning signs.  And due diligence says when you
start to see warning signs you should start your preparations for
launching the lifeboats.

> 
> I'm talking right now, today, no time for your port, or anything else.
> 

See above.

bill