OpenVMS Community License

[Warner Losh]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 9:06 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On 7/29/20 8:20 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 3:00 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> > <cctalk at classiccmp.org <mailto:cctalk at classiccmp.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 7/29/20 4:22 PM, Bob Smith wrote:
> >      > I am not sure I understand your "as it turns out there was only
> >     one" Bill.
> >      > Am I correct in assuming you are talking about DEC owned, and
> meaning
> >      > that Bob Supnik one?
> >      >
> >      > John Wilson's Ersatz 11, aka E11, was and is a great functioning
> >      > emulator, but not owned by DEC.
> >      >
> >
> >     We were discussing the Mentec Hobbyist License.  It never covered
> >     E11 or anything other than the Supnik Emulator when he was a DEC
> >     employee and DEC actually owned the IP.
> >
> >
> > How much of the IP does DEC need to own (the license is unclear on this
> > point)? Unless they conveyed the Copyrights to Supnik in writing (which
> > is possible), they (well their successors in interest) still have an
> > ownership interest in the emulator.
>
> This has been done to death years ago.  DEC gave up all ownership of
> what is now known as SIMH.  Look at the sources.  There are no DEC
> Copyrights.  There are Bob Supnik Copyrights from 1993 forward.
>
> >                                     One could make a case that the
> > wording of the license is imprecise enough
>
> The wording is only imprecise to those who do not wish to follow it.
> It is, by far, the cleanest and plainest written Hobbyist License I
> have ever seen.
>
> >                                             (it didn't exclude
> successors
> > in interest, for example).
>
> Successors to who?  It stopped being the property of DEC before DEC went
> away.  It became the sole property of Bob Supnik as reflected in the
> Copyright messages contained in the source files.
>
> >                                 Though finding out would require
> litigation,
> > which is an expensive game... and is apparently against the wishes of
> > Mentec, at least as expressed privately over the years...
>
> Expressed privately to who?
>
> >
> > The problem with the license being that it's written in a bit too plain
> > language which makes it a bit ambiguous once DEC was sold to Compaq and
> > then to HP since they are a successor interest for many other things...
>
> The EMULATOR in question ceased to be DEC's before DEC was bought by
> Compaq.  They were never owners of or in control of SIMH. Period.
>
> And with this, I am done. At least until this silly question comes up
> again in the future as I am sure it will.
>
> bill
>
>