[HECnet] TOPS-10/20 copyright status

On 11/15/2014 05:10 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote: It's certainly possible (IMO) that it could be brought into this era technologically, as it has a good base to build on, but I don't know of any companies or investors who would support such work. I think it should happen, but it likely will not. Think of it this way. Remember "wash boards"? I don't know if you have a different term for them in Sweden, but they are how we washed clothes a century ago, before automated washing machines. It's a rough metal plate in a wooden frame that sticks out of a bucket of soapy water, and you rub the clothes on it to flush out the dirt. If the wash board is patented, and someone still owns that patent, it's very unlikely that anyone in the business world would consider that patent to be worth anything, for the obvious reason. Analogies are always problematic. Consider this - a piece of software used in embedded applications is a piece of software you will probably never hear of. Might not even be possible to buy if you tried. Well yes, I understand that. I am an embedded systems developer. But see below. Does that mean it is dead, or have no value? This is the state of TOPS-20 at the moment. It is being used as embedded software, that you'll never see, or hear of. But it's still alive. I'm aware of the use of the XKL chipset's application in the network switches, but I was unaware of their use of TOPS-20. I thought they were running a bare-metal firmware load written for that purpose. Is this not the case, are they actually running TOPS-20, or at least some part(s) of it, on those embedded processors? If so, I need to pull a few strings and get my hands on one. Or several. But more broadly speaking, any kind of software have the same issue. Just because you do not see it used anywhere does not mean this is not the case. Assuming noone cares anymore just because you cannot find it used anywhere does not work. And even when noone actually do not care anymore, it is still sad when it is assumed that you can take liberties based on that assumption. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not condemning those who want to run cool software, or play with odd technology, and feel that there is no legal way of doing that. I just dislike when people try to present it in a way that make it sound like it was actually legal/ok/right. Understood and agreed. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA