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

[chris]

On 12/13/21 22:53, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 12/13/2021 3:17 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 12/12/21 7:34 PM, chris wrote:
>>> On 12/10/21 20:12, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 12/10/2021 10:46 AM, chris wrote:
>>>>> If you are a developer, you should try to walk the walk in terms
>>>>> of ethics and try to do the right thing. In the real world though,
>>>>> people will do whatever needs to be done to find a solution if there
>>>>> seems to b an insurmountable obstacle.
>>>>>
>>>>> The other point is, do the original owners really care enough, or
>>>>> even at all, when so much licensed software is out there and is
>>>>> obsolete and no longer sold ?. Similar case here, where I was trying
>>>>> find detail on the write boot block code for early SunOs for
>>>>> historical
>>>>> purposes. Found the complete source cd online and was able to complete
>>>>> the task. No profit involved, other than keeping some old machines
>>>>> alive.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ethical dilemmas everywhere in life and we all have to make our
>>>>> own choices...
>>>>
>>>> I don't think there is much ethical dilemma here.
>>>>
>>>> There should be no doubt that following the law is the etical
>>>> solution here.
>>>>
>>>> Arne
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, that's my whole point, but if no license is available from the
>>> original vendor, or they have ceased to exist, the user should stop
>>> using the product, irrespective of the effect on their business ?.
>>>
>>> Imho, it's a gross breach of good faith and trust for a vendor to
>>> provide no means of continuance in such cases...
>>>
>>
>> Companies come and go. Most don't want to fail, but it happens.
>> But I hardly think it is their fault that a customer doesn't take
>> appropriate actions to protect their future. Back in my mainframe
>> days we used to have COOP plans. Now, they were more targeted at
>> disasters like 9/11 but the idea is sound for even less disastrous
>> situations. If one sees a possibility (no matter how vague) of a
>> situation that could result in their demise they really should make
>> the effort to plan for it. And those plans should be updated and
>> maybe even movced up in priority if the vagueness seems to be fading
>> and the threat seems closer.
>
> I guess it's useless. There are some, (like those against Cobol), who
> will never admit that a vendor has a moral, if not legal, responsibility
> to customers.
>

Absolutely. As I said, all relationships in life depend on trust and a
shared understanding. Not all of that can be specified in contract,
which is so often used these days as a get out of jail card by vendors.

One of the reasons why Sun Micro were so successful was that they did
not nitpick about the detail, nor were they predatory over licensing.
They made quite enough money on the back of technical excellence and
better performance. Give and take between customer and vendor is
good for business. Currently, the open source model of free to use
and evaluate, then make a business from support seems to be working
very well. ie: give something away, goodwill etc, to score a much
larger chunk of real value business. Satisfied customers come back
with repeat business and maybe even help spread the word.

Seems obvious to me, but keep repeating the same mistakes of the
last century, learning nothing from them, suggests tunnel vision
and even stupidity. This is 2021, not 1990...

Chris