"Jay West" <jwest at classiccmp.org> skrev:
Johnny wrote...
> Jerome makes some interesting, if strange and
faulty assumptions.
> Such as assuming that since Mentec hasn't complained although people
> "appear" to have been using and posting about RT-11 on classiccmp list
> for a long time.
...and...
> So I would somewhat ignore Jeromes view on the
legality of things.
No, actually, Jerome's points are valid and his
views are worth far more
than an admonishment to ignore them.
I don't agree in this case. While I usually don't bother, since he's
mostly into RT-11, which I haven't used, we're in rather separate
worlds. But his assumptions about Mentec are just assumptions.
I should point out something that you dont seem to be
aware of (at least
based on your statement above) - a demonstrable pattern of
non-enforcement
of license does in fact weaken the ability to enforce
it. That is why
often
a company will act to notify, issue a cease &
desist, etc. an infringing
entity about an infraction of license that they actually in fact don't
really care about - because it can then be argued that they didn't
enforce
it in case xyz, so how can they selectively enforce it
in another
instance.
Yes, but this is all based on the assumption that the company is aware.
Otherwise it's not a point at all. So you should then first of all
demostrate that the company *is* aware, and haven't bother taking
action. I haven't seen that proven yet, and I'm pretty sure you haven't
either...
For the company to be aware two criteria must be fulfilled:
1) Mentec must know of this list, and monitor it.
2) People on this list must in no unclear terms make it clear that they
are breaking the license agreements or violating Mentecs rights.
And as I said before, I haven't seen either of these two proven yet.
But to make it easier for Mentec (in case they are looking), how about a
head count. Anyone who is using Mentec software without having a correct
license: let us all know. Make a public reply to this.
That will atleast fulfill one of the two requirements (if anyone will
reply to this call out.)
This is also one of several reasons that some - not
all - companies
are wary
of creating a hobbyist license, because there is some
amount of
perception
that it will put their ability to enforce a license at
peril - or at the
least possibly cloud the issue.
Yes. That is true.
On a separate and unrelated point, I believe Johnny
(or someone)
questioned
whether Mentec is aware of this list, various
archives, etc. I can
assure
you that they are, just as Jerome intoned.
Really? And how do you know this? Just because one ex-Mentec employee
occasionally post here, do you think that Mentec knows about it?
For all that I wish that a hobbyist program was available, none exist at
the moment, and actions and false beliefs like this is likely going to
keep preventing it from ever happening...
Call me Mr. Negative if you like. I just try to point out things as I
see them. You may all disagree. Can't help that. Atleast I got valid
licenses. And you can have that too, if you pay for it.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol