RE: Re: More questions [from herc/390]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tsagoth [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 05 November 2003 18:57
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [hercules-advocacy] Re: More questions [from herc/390]
> 
> --- In [email protected], "somitcw" <somitcw@e...> wrote:
> > >The poster from then said that while IBM had given
> > >up on their distribution right, they maintained
> > >their IP and that meant no modifying and handing
> > >out source.
> >
> > I'm no mouth-piece, but software written before
> > software copyright laws did not have a copyright
> > to give up. 

There has, as far as I know always been software copyright laws.
They certainly pre-date much of the software that is now free.
They did however require that the copyright owner declare their copyright.
IBM did not do this on early versions of VM. It therefore has no copyright
status. IBM cannot prevent it being copied, redistributed or modified.

> > IBM then also had a court order to
> > try to keep it from being a monopoly. IBM also
> > had to allow competitors reasonable access to
> > avoid restraint of trade law suits.
> >
> > If IBM nows allows unrestricted redistribution,
> > please provide proof.
> >
> 

Have I missed something? When IBM originally distributed software such as
MVS 3.8J US law stated that all copyright materials MUST carry a declaration
of copyright. So the original IBM PC bios, for example has a copyright
string near the start. Much PC software also has a copyright string in ASCII
at the start of the code, preceded by a jump which can conveniently be
hijacked by Virus Writers but that is another story.

Any way IBM did not include any declaration of copyright into the original
non-System Product versions of software. They can't stop it being copied or
used.


> Perhaps they don't, legally. The fact that the turnkey CD exists and
> they haven't (that I have read) said stop distributing it says to me
> that, at the least, they don't care that much. Maybe if Fujitsu or
> somebody started giving them away by the thousand, there'd be a
> different response.
> 

Provided there is nothing copyright on the CD they would be O.K.

> > > Assuming for a minute that it's not legal to modify
> > >and distribute 3.8j source, what about current macros.
> > >Suppose, OS/360 source in hand I decide I'm going to
> > >single handedly clone z/OS. In order to be compatible,
> > >at a minumum, would mean that my data areas would
> > >have to be the same, like say IHAPSA. The mapping
> > >macros are copyright by ibm, even though they are
> > >posted on the web. So does that mean I would be
> > >forbidden from writing a clone os that used the same
> > >macros/field names ? As in I'd have to call my area
> > >TSAGPSA and have all different names.
> >
> > I'm no mouth-piece, but if you want to write your
> > own zOS, go ahead. Do NOT copy any IBM Macros or
> > current IBM code.
> 
> I take this to mean that you believe I would have to have completely
> different fieldnames. So I would only be able to have binary
> compatibility, since I can see no way to assemble any CBT programs
> without using the real IBM macro. New macros would have to be created
> for the clone datareas, and then each program modified to use the new
> mapping macros. Is that right ? I just wasn't clear on whether
> copyright meant you couldn't use the actual name CVTUSER.
> 

This is an interesting issue. I think that currently IBM could prevent any
one from cloning Z/OS, because the data areas macros are copyright, and your
license restricts what purpose you may copy them for. This sort of thing
used to be widespread. For example LOTUS used to place restrictions on the
use of the NOTES API that prevented you using it to develop a competing user
interface to NOTES. Earlier developers of "C" compilers for the ATARI series
computers had problems because ATARI strictly enforced the copyright on the
".h" file that defined low memory, so you had to buy their developers kit to
get a copy....

It also means that adding functionality; say into VM/370 to duplicate things
that exist in VM/SP is difficult to do without infringement of copyright. I
think these is why IBM is not too worried...

<<Not in contrast Microsoft makes its APIs available for download>>

> > Writing zOS from scratch should keep you busy for
> > many years.
> >
> I expect it would, but I'm not that dedicated. I just like to tinker.
> 
> 
Dave Wade.



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Rent DVDs from home.
Over 14,500 titles. Free Shipping
& No Late Fees. Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/I3w.vC/hP.FAA/3jkFAA/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/