-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chase, John Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 8:47 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: zIIP API for ISV's
> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:38:53 -0600, Chase, John wrote: > >> > >> I believe that the information is being given out under a license > >> agreement at no or nominal charge (not positive about this). > > > >It seems illogical to require a license to *write* code to use an > >existing API, but *not* require the same (or similar) > license to *run* > >code already written to use that API. > > > There's precedent for requiring a higher license for use of the > authoring tools than for using their product. For example, a separate > license is needed for the C compiler, but, since LE, the code the > compiler produces can be run on the base OS. Arguably, *any* code that can be written at all can be written in Assembler, for which a license is delivered with the operating system license. Likewise for any API. "In the end", compilers produce "executable code", which most easily can be "untranslated" into Assembler source. Now that surfaces an interesting quandary: The IBM licenses generally prohibit both "disassembly" and "reverse engineering" of IBM code; yet one cannot make sense out of the contents of a dump without developing an ability to "read executable code" at least superficially. "Reading executable code" almost necessarily is a form of "disassembly" (it's a lot easier to think in terms of assembler source instructions than to read the machine code "natively"). So: 1. At what point does "reading executable code" become "disassembly" contrary to license provisions? 2. At what point does "disassembly" become "reverse engineering"? 3. Would a "sharp" customer programmer who figures out how to write and successfully execute an SRB enclave on a zIIP without first obtaining the "zIIP API license" be guilty of "software piracy" of some sort? Think SHOWZOS....... <SNIP> And then start looking at PSI... All of this is splitting hairs. At some point someone will get a process patent for breathing. When will we realize that the point of IP law is being subverted by PHBs, MBAs, etc.? 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
