-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mohammad Khan Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 3:08 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: It keeps getting uglier
Nice argument but do you have any law firbidding reverse engineering to make compatible products ? Patents are the only legal instrument that would deny such a competetion. When no patents are involved it's a fair game. Even when patents are involved they can be challanged for specificity, applicablity etc. Either IBM shows that PSI has voilated a patent or shut up. Restricting the use of software by EULA's is not a fair practice. Think of Microsoft requiring that you run their software on an Intel CPU only. Mohammad <SNIP> While you might actually get a challenge to "shrink-wrap open it and you agree to the EULA" through a court, and that court might strike down all or parts of the EULA for any number of reasons, you have opened a can of worms. Should Microsoft purchase AMD or Intel, and then start putting out copies of Windoze that will only run on a CPU made by that company (by putting in secret instructions, or specialized code to enhance running speeds), you have just stepped into the problem of IBM vs PSI. As you can see, your argument misses that IBM makes both the hardware and the software. And they architect the hardware FOR their SCPs and they architect their software FOR their hardware. That they have shared information on their hardware for z/Linux is the only saving grace that PSI can grab onto at this point (from this particular perspective). But why by a PSI machine just to run z/Linux? My whole problem with this is, PSI relied on certain information that IBM stated on their web site. I believe this is considered to be "holding out" (not keeping from, but holding themselves out to do ....). The timing of the change in IBM's policy and the filing of the case is somewhat suspect. So it is not quite that simple. And all arguments to the contrary, IBM did license their patents, and so they did BILLIONS of dollars of research. They chose (up to the point they pulled their web page) to license their patents. And at the same time, as I have said before, IBM licenses other patents for their systems (e.g., AMDAHL had several that IBM licensed). Regards, Steve Thompson -- All opinions expressed by me are my own and may not necessarily reflect those of my employer. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
