[Info-vax] VMS VAX License for personal Microvax 3100 Model 40

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 7/25/22 18:05, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <tbmqh7$1dgr0$1 at dont-email.me>,
> Simon Clubley  <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> At this point, I am way more concerned about people pissing off VSI
>> than I am about them pissing off HPE.
> 
> I hear your ethical argument, but I find this point in
> particular kind of bizarre.  Why should VSI care?  They
> didn't license the VAX product and they don't issue VAX
> licenses.  In effect they have nothing to do with VAX,
> and VMS on VAX has not been updated with the last 20
> years or so of development on VMS generally, anyway.

Because some people see this as demonstrating an attitude that
licenses really don't mean anything and they will do as they
please even with other people's IP.  There a still some who
feel strongly that it was that cavalier attitude the resulted
in there never being a legitimate PDP-11 Hobbyist Program.

> 
> So if someone were to set up VAX/VMS on real hardware,
> or even in a simulator, why should VSI consider that
> any differently than, say, someone setting up SunOS 4.1.3
> in a SPARCstation emulator?  

Nothing illegal, immoral or unethical about that.  Owning a SPACStation
was all that Sun required for the use of SunOS 4.1.3.  I am not aware
of any Sparc emulators.

>                                Or doing something with
> Windows XP on an old PC?

Without a License code you won't do much with XP. Even with
one you won;t do much with it.  I still play with everything
from WFW 2.11, NT, 2000 and everything in between.  But I
have licenses for them and I am sure there are thousands sitting
in people's desk drawers.

> 
> Again, why should they care?  Simply because it shows
> that there are scofflaws in the VMS community who will
> disregard the licensing requirements?

Exactly.

> 
> I find that kind of hard to believe.

Only time will tell.

bill