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

[Dan Cross]

In article <jk8jhjF7pt9U1 at mid.individual.net>,
Bill Gunshannon  <bill.gunshannon at gmail.com> wrote:
>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 what I said at the end of my note.

But again, why should VSI care?  They have nothing to do
with VAX.  If people started doing this for Alpha, Itanium
or x86, I could see it since VSI has interest in those
platforms.  But VAX is explicitly out of their domain.

>> 
>> 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.

QEMU emulates various SPARCstations and there's TME.

>>                              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.

You bandit, you.

People used to generate them XP licenses.

>> 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.

I suppose so.

	- Dan C.