Hi There,

More than a year later:

Is possible has got VAX VMS license like hobbyist was for example in 2018 or 2019?

TIA,
Ruzsi

Den 2022-04-17 kl. 12:26, skrev Attila Ruzsinszky:
> Hi There,
>
> More than a year later:
>
> Is possible has got VAX VMS license like hobbyist was for example in 2018 or 2019?
>
> TIA,
> Ruzsi

Hi.

Se the more current thread "Hobbyist licences for VAX"
for a more up to date summary. I think you have the
answers there, maybe not the answers you hoped for...

On 2022-04-17, Attila Ruzsinszky <ruzsinszky.attila@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> More than a year later:
>
> Is possible has got VAX VMS license like hobbyist was for example in 2018 or 2019?
>

The VAX hobbyist licence program terminated at the start of this year.

There is no legal replacement. (Unless you want to write your own
version of VMS. :-))

You can run an older OpenBSD or the current NetBSD on your machines
if you wish however.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
>There is no legal replacement. (Unless you want to write your own
>version of VMS. :-))
>
>You can run an older OpenBSD or the current NetBSD on your machines
>if you wish however.

But! But! Whatever happened to "The Future is VAX! Digital Has It Now!"
anyway?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 2022-04-17, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
>>There is no legal replacement. (Unless you want to write your own
>>version of VMS. :-))
>>
>>You can run an older OpenBSD or the current NetBSD on your machines
>>if you wish however.
>
> But! But! Whatever happened to "The Future is VAX! Digital Has It Now!"
> anyway?

What happened is that DEC lost its way in the late 1980s and started
killing things that it should never have killed.

By the time Alpha came around, that gave DEC a temporary stay of
execution, but only a temporary stay of execution.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 5:01:09 PM UTC-7, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-04-17, Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
> > Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:
> >>There is no legal replacement. (Unless you want to write your own
> >>version of VMS. :-))
> >>
> >>You can run an older OpenBSD or the current NetBSD on your machines
> >>if you wish however.
> >
> > But! But! Whatever happened to "The Future is VAX! Digital Has It Now!"
> > anyway?
> What happened is that DEC lost its way in the late 1980s and started
> killing things that it should never have killed.
>
> By the time Alpha came around, that gave DEC a temporary stay of
> execution, but only a temporary stay of execution.
> Simon.
>
> --
> Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
> Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

What of licenses from dead VAXen that were sent to the bone yard many_many years ago, bought by entities that no longer exist?
Some of us might have hoarded folders full of paper that will still work, but have no need for.
If these abandoned licenses are re-used by true hobbyists and not commercial entities, is the decision grey or black and white?

Just a thought experiment.

Crabs

On 4/18/2022 11:44 AM, Crabs wrote:
> What of licenses from dead VAXen that were sent to the bone yard many_many years ago, bought by entities that no longer exist?
> Some of us might have hoarded folders full of paper that will still work, but have no need for.
> If these abandoned licenses are re-used by true hobbyists and not commercial entities, is the decision grey or black and white?

That would depend on what the license rules say.

I got the impression that:

license transfer approved HP => white
license transfer not approved HP => black

But check.

Arne

Am 18.04.2022 um 17:51 schrieb Arne Vajhøj:
> On 4/18/2022 11:44 AM, Crabs wrote:
>> What of licenses from dead VAXen that were sent to the bone yard
>> many_many years ago, bought by entities that no longer exist?
>> Some of us might have hoarded folders full of paper that will still
>> work, but have no need for.
>> If these abandoned licenses are re-used by true hobbyists and not
>> commercial entities, is the decision grey or black and white?
>
> That would depend on what the license rules say.
>
> I got the impression that:
>
> license transfer approved HP => white
> license transfer not approved HP => black
>
> But check.
>
> Arne
>
>
May also vary from country to country depending on local law. In some
countries license transfer may be legal since a clause excluding it in
the license rules might be considered unfair business practice. In
Germany, for example, it is possible to legally buy used Microsoft
Windows licenses without explicit consent from Microsoft. I don't see
why this should not apply to VMS licenses, but I am not a lawyer..

Norbert

Crabs <tomc@frontieranalytical.com> wrote:
>
>What of licenses from dead VAXen that were sent to the bone yard many_many years ago, bought by entities that no longer exist?

They aren't transferrable.

>Some of us might have hoarded folders full of paper that will still work, but have no need for.

You can't transfer them. The original purchaser owns them.

>If these abandoned licenses are re-used by true hobbyists and not commercial entities, is the decision grey or black and white?

It is black and white. Read the wording on the PAK, it very specifically says it cannot be
transferred.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 4/18/2022 2:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Crabs <tomc@frontieranalytical.com> wrote:
>>
>> What of licenses from dead VAXen that were sent to the bone yard many_many years ago, bought by entities that no longer exist?
>
> They aren't transferrable.
>
>> Some of us might have hoarded folders full of paper that will still work, but have no need for.
>
> You can't transfer them. The original purchaser owns them.
>
>> If these abandoned licenses are re-used by true hobbyists and not commercial entities, is the decision grey or black and white?
>
> It is black and white. Read the wording on the PAK, it very specifically says it cannot be
> transferred.
> --scott
>

But one could sub-lease it (or whatever) from the license holder.

Perhaps $1 for a 99 year lease?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

> May also vary from country to country depending on local law.

I suppose that at least some countries have legislated statutes,
administrative policies, tariffs, or combinations thereof, that apply to
license transfers from other countries, or to other countries.

Combining that with some nation allowing transfers between parties under
its governance, It sounds like you’d need proof of provenance, if you want
to be as safe as possible when acquiring a license from anyone other than a
transfer agent within your same legal jurisdiction that is authorized by
the original grantor of the license.

Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.

On 18/04/2022 22:50, Galen wrote:
>
>> May also vary from country to country depending on local law.
>
> I suppose that at least some countries have legislated statutes,
> administrative policies, tariffs, or combinations thereof, that apply to
> license transfers from other countries, or to other countries.
>
> Combining that with some nation allowing transfers between parties under
> its governance, It sounds like you’d need proof of provenance, if you want
> to be as safe as possible when acquiring a license from anyone other than a
> transfer agent within your same legal jurisdiction that is authorized by
> the original grantor of the license.
>
> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
>

But are HP even interested?

--
Chris

Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>
>But one could sub-lease it (or whatever) from the license holder.
>
>Perhaps $1 for a 99 year lease?

Sadly not. Read the fine print, it's pretty impressive.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Chris Townley <news@cct-net.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
>>
>
>But are HP even interested?

No, that's the basic problem.
HP are not interested enough to go after people illegally using the software
but they ALSO are not interested enough to release the software openly either.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Info-vax <info-vax-bounces@rbnsn.com> On Behalf Of Chris Townley
> via Info-vax
> Sent: April-18-22 7:22 PM
> To: info-vax@rbnsn.com
> Cc: Chris Townley <news@cct-net.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Info-vax] vax vms licenses
>
> On 18/04/2022 22:50, Galen wrote:
> >
> >> May also vary from country to country depending on local law.
> >
> > I suppose that at least some countries have legislated statutes,
> > administrative policies, tariffs, or combinations thereof, that apply
> > to license transfers from other countries, or to other countries.
> >
> > Combining that with some nation allowing transfers between parties
> > under its governance, It sounds like you’d need proof of provenance,
> > if you want to be as safe as possible when acquiring a license from
> > anyone other than a transfer agent within your same legal jurisdiction
> > that is authorized by the original grantor of the license.
> >
> > Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
> >
>
> But are HP even interested?
>
>
> --
> Chris

Not to be picky, but HP is the new company that split form original HP and now only focusses on PC's, Printers, end user stuff.

HPE is the other half of the split that focuses on the Enterprise side of the business.

With the exception of supercomputer platforms (HPE bought SGI), HPE no longer views OS platforms as strategic, so licensing terms from a platform 25+ years ago is likely going to get as much interest internally to HPE as a fly in a swamp.

😊

Regards,

Kerry Main
Kerry dot main at starkgaming dot com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On 4/18/2022 6:43 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Chris Townley <news@cct-net.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
>>
>> But are HP even interested?
>
> No, that's the basic problem.
> HP are not interested enough to go after people illegally using the software

I would not necessarily rely on that.

Legal department may have a policy of pursuing all copyright
infringements for the signal value.

> but they ALSO are not interested enough to release the software openly either.

That I believe!

Arne

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 2:50:53 PM UTC-7, Galen wrote:

> I suppose that at least some countries have legislated statutes,
> administrative policies, tariffs, or combinations thereof, that apply to
> license transfers from other countries, or to other countries.
> Combining that with some nation allowing transfers between parties under
> its governance, It sounds like you’d need proof of provenance, if you want
> to be as safe as possible when acquiring a license from anyone other than a
> transfer agent within your same legal jurisdiction that is authorized by
> the original grantor of the license.
> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.

IANAL, but as well as I know, when a company buys another company
they get all the assets of that company. That is, in legal terms, it
doesn't count as a "transfer". (I believe that also applies to other
IP, such as e-mail address lists. When a company says that they
don't sell their e-mail address list, as what about selling the
whole company?)

On 4/18/2022 8:05 PM, gah4 wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 2:50:53 PM UTC-7, Galen wrote:
>> I suppose that at least some countries have legislated statutes,
>> administrative policies, tariffs, or combinations thereof, that apply to
>> license transfers from other countries, or to other countries.
>
>> Combining that with some nation allowing transfers between parties under
>> its governance, It sounds like you’d need proof of provenance, if you want
>> to be as safe as possible when acquiring a license from anyone other than a
>> transfer agent within your same legal jurisdiction that is authorized by
>> the original grantor of the license.
>
>> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
>
> IANAL, but as well as I know, when a company buys another company
> they get all the assets of that company. That is, in legal terms, it
> doesn't count as a "transfer". (I believe that also applies to other
> IP, such as e-mail address lists. When a company says that they
> don't sell their e-mail address list, as what about selling the
> whole company?)

As usual those in need for a legal opinion should consult
a lawyer.

But my understanding is that the transfer of a VMS license
is needed whenever the license get transferred from one server
to another server even within the same company. So making an
acquisition/merger is pointless.

Arne

On 4/18/2022 6:43 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Chris Townley <news@cct-net.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
>>>
>>
>> But are HP even interested?
>
> No, that's the basic problem.
> HP are not interested enough to go after people illegally using the software
> but they ALSO are not interested enough to release the software openly either.
> --scott
>

So then, just what is the problem?

As we used to say in the pickup basketball games, "no blood, no foul".

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 10:28:29 PM UTC-7, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 4/18/2022 6:43 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > Chris Townley <ne...@cct-net.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
> >>>
> >>
> >> But are HP even interested?
> >
> > No, that's the basic problem.
> > HP are not interested enough to go after people illegally using the software
> > but they ALSO are not interested enough to release the software openly either.
> > --scott
> >
> So then, just what is the problem?
>
> As we used to say in the pickup basketball games, "no blood, no foul".
> --
> David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: da...@tsoft-inc.com
> DFE Ultralights, Inc.
> 170 Grimplin Road
> Vanderbilt, PA 15486
"Legal department may have a policy of pursuing all copyright
infringements for the signal value."

In the US, at least, you can only recover actual damages in a copyright infringement suit (enhanced with punitive damages based on those if you have registered a copyright). There's also the notion of "fair use" and the fact that there are some court rulings in the US that support the notion that using software that is only protected by copyright for personal use is "fair use".

Copyright law is unlike trademark law where you need to pursue infringement or risk losing trademark protection. This is one of the factors that leads to companies forcing small, insignificant, local businesses to stop using look-alike logos or similar names to their trademark protected logos, names, etc. Many people don't understand that legally, once they become aware of the use, they must try to stop it.

This whole thing is complicated, though, by the fact that it is licensed software and that you have to use a fake key not issued by HP to use it. One of the reasons software licensing became commonplace is exactly because copyright protection is so weak. So HP is in a much stronger position due to stop people than they would be if they were merely depending on copyright. And it is hard to argue innocence if you go to the trouble of generating a key and install VAX/VMS.

On 04/19/22 16:53, Don Baccus wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 10:28:29 PM UTC-7, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 4/18/2022 6:43 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>> Chris Townley<ne...@cct-net.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like murky waters, probably even for I.P. Lawyers and courts.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But are HP even interested?
>>>
>>> No, that's the basic problem.
>>> HP are not interested enough to go after people illegally using the software
>>> but they ALSO are not interested enough to release the software openly either.
>>> --scott
>>>
>> So then, just what is the problem?
>>
>> As we used to say in the pickup basketball games, "no blood, no foul".
>> --
>> David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
>> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: da...@tsoft-inc.com
>> DFE Ultralights, Inc.
>> 170 Grimplin Road
>> Vanderbilt, PA 15486
> "Legal department may have a policy of pursuing all copyright
> infringements for the signal value."
>
> In the US, at least, you can only recover actual damages in a copyright infringement suit (enhanced with punitive damages based on those if you have registered a copyright). There's also the notion of "fair use" and the fact that there are some court rulings in the US that support the notion that using software that is only protected by copyright for personal use is "fair use".
>
> Copyright law is unlike trademark law where you need to pursue infringement or risk losing trademark protection. This is one of the factors that leads to companies forcing small, insignificant, local businesses to stop using look-alike logos or similar names to their trademark protected logos, names, etc. Many people don't understand that legally, once they become aware of the use, they must try to stop it.
>
> This whole thing is complicated, though, by the fact that it is licensed software and that you have to use a fake key not issued by HP to use it. One of the reasons software licensing became commonplace is exactly because copyright protection is so weak. So HP is in a much stronger position due to stop people than they would be if they were merely depending on copyright. And it is hard to argue innocence if you go to the trouble of generating a key and install VAX/VMS.

Not familiar with later versions, but at least with 5.4 vax, it's
possible to install vms and have indefinate access with the root
account (sorry, was it operator ?) with no licence input at all.
Istr, it nags you, but doesn't stop anything happening.

I was given a VSII/GPX by a company I worked for, 1990, and never got
round to transferring the licence, though it was only powered
up from time to time and never used for anything serious, just
out of interest.

Even Oracle have quite generous licensing terms, where any of
the software downloaded from their website is free to use
for non commercial purposes. Very wide range as well. Don't
understand why vms should still use the archaic lmf style
licensing, but I guess they think there is a good reason...

Chris

On 2022-04-19, chris <chris-nospam@tridac.net> wrote:
>
> Not familiar with later versions, but at least with 5.4 vax, it's
> possible to install vms and have indefinate access with the root
> account (sorry, was it operator ?) with no licence input at all.
> Istr, it nags you, but doesn't stop anything happening.
>

Ignoring the legal issues, you can work from OPA0: in this way, but
you have no networking and no access to any DEC layered products,
including the compilers, as they also require licences to be installed.

> I was given a VSII/GPX by a company I worked for, 1990, and never got
> round to transferring the licence, though it was only powered
> up from time to time and never used for anything serious, just
> out of interest.
>
> Even Oracle have quite generous licensing terms, where any of
> the software downloaded from their website is free to use
> for non commercial purposes. Very wide range as well. Don't
> understand why vms should still use the archaic lmf style
> licensing, but I guess they think there is a good reason...
>

It's part of the historical DEC mindset unfortunately that may have
been perfectly acceptable at one time but which has not adapted to
today's world.

Don't forget that VSI has now become the company that has imposed
time-limited _production_ licences on its customers and they expect
the customers to just accept this.

IOW, with these time-limited production licences, if VSI goes bust,
then those licences will eventually stop working and hence so will
the customer systems those licences are installed on.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 18:05 +0000, Simon Clubley wrote:
> IOW, with these time-limited production licences, if VSI goes bust,
> then those licences will eventually stop working and hence so will
> the customer systems those licences are installed on.

That's particularly worrying and that's something VSI needs to be aware
of *OR* VMS will go the way of dinosaurs for good.
--
Tactical Nuclear Kittens

On 4/19/22 16:40, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-04-19 at 18:05 +0000, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> IOW, with these time-limited production licences, if VSI goes bust,
>> then those licences will eventually stop working and hence so will
>> the customer systems those licences are installed on.
>
> That's particularly worrying and that's something VSI needs to be aware
> of *OR* VMS will go the way of dinosaurs for good.

Unless they have their heads very deep in the sand, VSI is very
aware of what people think of the situation.

bill

On 04/19/22 19:05, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-04-19, chris<chris-nospam@tridac.net> wrote:
>>
>> Not familiar with later versions, but at least with 5.4 vax, it's
>> possible to install vms and have indefinate access with the root
>> account (sorry, was it operator ?) with no licence input at all.
>> Istr, it nags you, but doesn't stop anything happening.
>>
>
> Ignoring the legal issues, you can work from OPA0: in this way, but
> you have no networking and no access to any DEC layered products,
> including the compilers, as they also require licences to be installed.
>

That's right and iirc, decwindows worked as well. That machine did
have Wolongong TCP/IP and the Vax C compiler, perhaps more, but never
did any serious work with it. Loads of Deccery at work, but
already moved over to a first Sun workstation for home use. I
really liked Decwrite on VMS though, years ahead of the pack, but
vms incompatability at various levels with the developing industry
standards made it a bad career move to invest too much time on.
So much design elegance, effort and leadership from DEC and still
a sad loss.

>> I was given a VSII/GPX by a company I worked for, 1990, and never got
>> round to transferring the licence, though it was only powered
>> up from time to time and never used for anything serious, just
>> out of interest.
>>
>> Even Oracle have quite generous licensing terms, where any of
>> the software downloaded from their website is free to use
>> for non commercial purposes. Very wide range as well. Don't
>> understand why vms should still use the archaic lmf style
>> licensing, but I guess they think there is a good reason...
>>
>
> It's part of the historical DEC mindset unfortunately that may have
> been perfectly acceptable at one time but which has not adapted to
> today's world.
>
> Don't forget that VSI has now become the company that has imposed
> time-limited _production_ licences on its customers and they expect
> the customers to just accept this.
>
> IOW, with these time-limited production licences, if VSI goes bust,
> then those licences will eventually stop working and hence so will
> the customer systems those licences are installed on.
>
> Simon.
>

Time will tell, but time limited licences would be definate show
stopper for me. Any sort of LMF implies a lack of trust and that
is core to all relationships in life...

Chris