> Sounds to me like you could now be sued for using the old technique of > writing (E)STAE routines to emulate instructions not avalable on your > model processor.
Worst case, only if they were patented instructions. The patents allegedly are on OS/390 and z/OS however, not hardware. Even if some aspect of an instruction's implementation were patented, an ESTAE exit simulation might not violate the patent (might not use the patented aspects). Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick O'Keefe Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 12:31 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: IBM sues maker of Intel-based Mainframe clones On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 21:06:53 -0600, Phil Sidler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sounds to me like you could now be sued for using the old technique of writing (E)STAE routines to emulate instructions not avalable on your model processor. Or maybe even macros that replace based instructions with relative instructions. Duplicate the behavior of an IBM instruction and you can get sued. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
