ajp166 at bellatlantic.net
Mon Dec 12 17:31:02 CST 2005
>Subject: Re: PC-DOS 3.3
> From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com>
> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:20:52 -0800
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>On 12/12/2005 at 4:27 PM Jim Leonard wrote:
>>MS-DOS was officially end-of-lifed by MS so I don't see the harm. We
>>don't have a problem distributing obscure OSes, tape loaders, and CPM so
>>should DOS be any different?
>Well, there is a difference. MS-DOS/PC-DOS can still be run on modern
>machines--there's no argument that "the hardware to run it doesn't exist
>any more". And both firms that can claim copyright (good for 95 years) are
>still around. I'd hate to get a letter from a Microsoft suit saying "cease
>and desist--and pay us $250,000".
>Not to put too fine a point on it, but I can't legally make copies and
>distribute an out-of-print literary work without permission, why is there a
>difference with software? Has anyone asked Microsoft or IBM if it would be
>okay? Or do we already know that the answer is going to be "no", so we
>might as well not ask and draw attention to things?
Exactly! FYI: CP/M does still have a copyright in effect only the license
to use and distribute for NON_COMMERCIAL purposes has changed.
Thank you Tim Olmstead for persuing this.
The bottom like is yes, there is a lot of software that can be copied freely
for for hobbiest use but the copyright is still in effect and the license
that allows it is now suspended for whatever reasons.
Would MS do that with dos up to say 6.22? No idea.
More information about the cctech