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

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 12/11/21 10:56 AM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 12/11/2021 8:26 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 12/11/21 8:19 AM, VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>>> In article <sp09f5$ap3$1 at dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley
>>> <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>>> 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 ?
>>>
>>> No *patch* required. ;)
>>>
>>
>> True.  There is always PAKGEN.  Not legal, but we have had enough
>> people here express their lack of concern that it is obviously
>> seen as a potential solution.
>>
>> bill
>>
> 
> Either you just don't "get it", or, perhaps you just don't care.

Oh, I get it.  And I do care.  But probably not about the same things
you care about.

> 
> The need for such an action would only occur if for some reason people 
> could no longer use their VMS solutions.  

And that will not happen overnight.  If there is even the slightest
possibility of it occurring then people should be making plans for
it now and not waiting until it is a crisis.  That's what Risk
Assessment and Due Diligence are all about.


>                                          I really don't want to see 
> that happen.  That's why I won't discuss methods.  It would still be 
> rather sub-optimal.  VMS users need VSI (or something similar) to 
> continue to develop VMS, to correct errors, to insure security, and 
> such.  Usage without that would not be a good thing.
> 
> But the actual issue, to me, is the harm done if all of a sudden VMS 
> systems stop working, companies fail, many people lose their jobs, a 
> real mess.  

And who's fault would that be?

>            In such a case I for one would not care about any copyright 
> issues.  I  would "do the right thing".

So, I take it you go along with the current idea being pushed by the
Dems that all this looting is justified because people are hungry?
Wrong is no longer wrong if it doesn't coincide with your desires.

> 
> One can hope that never happens.  

But one should be working on contingencies now and not waiting until
disaster strikes.  Would you not buy insurance and then just take
your neighbors car when yours gets wrecked through no fault of your
own?

>                                   But in a world where once again the 
> Taliban are chucking a girl in a pit and chucking rocks at her, I'd 
> hoped that would never happen either.
> 
> Do you care Bill ???

Do I care about what?  I care about my dog.  I also care about other
people's property.  I don't shoplift (even though it is now not even
illegal in many jurisdictions).  While, as I said, I no longer have
a dog in the fight, I am still active in the IT world (business and
academia) and I continue to champion the things that are good business
and point out those practices that are not.

bill