Re: Re: Has IBM changed its licenses?

"halfmeg " wrote:

>  Ok, so now you state IBM's license has no bearing on non-licensees.
> This is something IBM might disagree with, if it involves their IP.

There is no IBM license for Flex-ES when sold through our own channels
to the production customer, and
of course there is no AD-CD for a production customer.  The only IBM
consideration in that case are the license terms under which they grant
use of their software for use on Flex-ES, which is generally speaking no
different than for traditional hardware.

> "PWD is the only FLEX-ES-based offering of IBM", who sells FLEX to
> production end users?

Our own hard-won reseller channel.

> FUNSOFT's web site implies that you are concerned with IBM licenses
> to which you are not a party. "All license terms for all operating
> systems and applications must be adhered to strictly."

I said in my last note that we are not concerned about IBM licenses when
they are not a party, but you
are correct that we are concerned about their license when they ARE a
party.  They are a party when one is talking about licensing their
software on a box, but they are not a party when talking about the
production license of Flex-ES to a customer.  What is so hard about that
concept?

> The link below is not additional for specific products, it is for
> usage of the ADCD and contains requirements to obtain (purchase or
> lease) an IBM authorized system from the PartnerWorld for Developer
> (PWD) Program or the FLEX-ES emulator from a PWD qualified IBM
> Business Partner.  This doesn't exactly seem like a free loan license.
>
>

That is my understanding too -- if one qualifies, one can get the loan.
The cost is in the qualifying.


> Don't think they really want folks to develop without paying
> the "participation fee".  Especially when they are cutting out those
> who have already paid once.  "Please note: members with older P390,
> R390, or Integrated Server (3006) development systems are not
> eligible to receive a copy of the z/OS 1.4 ADCD."
>
> Phil - It still stinks and this last part may violate an earlier
> agreement with their PWD licensees

My guess is if the P/390 had kept up with the architecture then PWD's
attitude about continued software support would be different.   I
believe loans are renewable on an annual basis so T's&C's can change at
least that often with it being a "violation".

PDW



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/LIgTpC/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/dpFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
hercules-advocacy-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/