DIscussion of licensing issues is frowned upon on the Hercules list because it never leads to understanding; all it does is add heat and no light. I would suggest the same policy here. If you're not comfortable giving someone advice because of the content of their message, then don't, but chastising them over it in public does very little good.
On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM Radoslaw Skorupka < [email protected]> wrote: > RESENT WITH BETTER (I HOPE) FORMATTING > I'm sorry for inconvenience. > > W dniu 29.11.2025 o 06:08, Brian Westerman pisze: > > I would hate to see IBM-MAIN be penalized because of involvement with > illegal use of th ADCD system. > > IMHO there is no such risk. > It would be ridiculous to claim that IBM-MAIN is helping piracy just > because someone asked technical question and got answer from another > person. > Actually no one here provided the proof of licence with the question. > Should we demand full licencing audit report before answering? > I do not support software piracy, however I'm not going to check > someone's licences whenever I respond about RACF, FICON, ICSF, whatever. > > > BTW: The original question was the following: > "I would like to know if CPENABLE applies to ADCD environments. If it > does, what would be the best definition?" > I see CPENABLE and ADCD here. Nothing about improper or unlicensed use. > Did I miss something? > > > > > -- > Radoslaw Skorupka > Lodz, Poland > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- Jay Maynard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
