> There might be something in that, but it strikes me very much
> as 'locking
> the stable door' if that was the thought process which
> occured: the redbook
> in question has been out for over six months. Pulling the Hercules
> references now seems pointless. Also, if IBM had substantive
> IP concerns
> about Herc (and there's no reason to suspect that they do),
> they would go
> after Jay, Roger, and the lead developers, not just pull
> references from a
> redbook!

True, but remember that we're dealing with lawyers here, who have a really
eccentric viewpoint of How Things Work and What's Important.

If the goal is for IBM to protect the 390 intellectual property, they have
to be "vigilant and/or diligent" in pursuing and enforcing copyright and
usage of same. If they let this slide, then some other smart lawyer type
*might* be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of another lawyer type
that they haven't been pursuing it appropriately, and IBM would lose the
protection of copyright law for the S/390 intellectual property.  This falls
under the heading of A Very Bad Thing for corporate lawyer types -- consider
the price paid by the folks at General Mills when they let the Jell-O(tm)
trademark fall into the public domain. Thus, they can't be seen to allow
such references to become "genericized" or risk losing the legal protection
of the information.


> That question has been in a lot of peoples heads for some
> time, and I can
> think of very few people who would disagree with you. If they
> were foolish
> enough to go for the latter option - use legal muscle to shut
> down a very
> successful open-source operation (or try to shut it down; it
> would just go
> overseas, it ain't going away!) - they would loose a hell of
> a lot of the
> goodwill capital they've built up in the open-source community.

Yep. Thus, I think, the quiet approach -- don't ask, don't tell, don't
promote, don't persecute...unless the Hercules guys do something so
egregiously stupid in public that IBM can't possibly ignore them any longer.
I think Jay, et al are smarter than that, but then again, I've been wrong
before on the open source community.

-- db

Reply via email to