Re: News - Commercial Version of Hercules - Turbo Hercules

--- In [email protected], Mike Schwab <Mike.A.Schwab@...> wrote:
>
> >> won't stick (when tested in court). Exactly how
> >> does one implement a "compare and swap instruction"
> >> found in a z/OS executable without violating any
> >> patents?
> >
> The Hercules authors have re-implemented the published 
> user interface
> (The instruction operation code and how the data in 
> the instructions,
> registers, memory, PSW, channels, DASD are affected) in software
> without using their hardware techniques.

Right, and if they implement that without ever seeing
IBM's firmware, and it happens to be identical (not
established) to how IBM implemented their version,
then it's probably an obvious and non-patentable
implementation.

> > But if I coin a new word in the English language, does
> > that mean that I get to assert ownership of any
> > translation of it forever?
>
> That is called a trademark of a word or phrase.

And even if IBM attempted to trademark the name
of the compare and swap instruction, it is in
fact just a bit pattern. It doesn't matter a damn
what the bit pattern is called by IBM, or in the
Hercules comments. They can't trademark a bit
pattern.

Not that they've even attempted that particular bit
of insanity.

Anyway, we'll see what the courts have to say. They
will have their own personal opinions. As far as I
can tell, these things all come down to personal
opinions of judges, and anything actually written
down in law is just a guide for inexperienced
judges. (same as speed limits are a guide for
inexperienced drivers).

BFN.  Paul.