VMS sources (was: Re: [HECnet] NCP-F-NETIO)

[Clem Cole]

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:33 PM, <Paul_Koning at dell.com> wrote:
it only means that the IP owners didn't find it worth the trouble to enforce the software license.


Fair enough.   But it was standard practice.    I have not idea if Xerox paid DEC for the licenses for the compiler and other tools suite for their PDP-10 clone at PARC.    It possible they just shied away from anything with such a copyright notice, and could because like UNIX today, all of the research community was using PDP-10s (which is why they wanted one at PARC) and there were "open source" and "free" compilers that the DARPA had paid for coming out Stanford, CMU, MIT and the like. I never used that machine, but I certainly new of it.

By the mid late 1970s, I did use an Alto, and the SW we were running on it by that time was Xerox created.    But one of it's designers is an old friend (and officemate) and he used to say their had been a lot of Nova code running on the Altos.    How much did the use from DG, again I do not know.

I do know the Amdahl's ran IBM code.   IBM had just been sued about "bundling" SW so, it possible they ignored it a bit because they were being chased from the Justice Dept WRT monopoly and just decided it was not worth trying to enforce it.