http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/computer-sciences-corporation-history/ Has some bits of data from my memory. I did some work on the Mailgram system, putting PDP8/e boxes as comms front ends to 1108s.
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 8:42 PM jim stephens via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > Does anyone have any information on Infonet, which was a timesharing > which CSC put out? I've got some info that it had a timesharing service > called CSTS and would like info on that. > > I've got info on the original version of the Pick system which IP was > owned by TRW and was called GIM. The CSTS Infonet service provided > access in some way to IGIM, which is in a manual I just obtained. > > So I want to know if there is any CSTS manuals or documents (ideally) > anyone may have. > > Secondly it looks like rather than IBM mainframes for timeshare, the > systems that Infonet shared were Univac 1108s. So looking for verifying > that. > > Especially if the systems were all Univac was IGIM running on the 1108. > > The time frame for the manual is 1974. GIM dates from 69 to 70 from a > TRW contract. Actual product was obviously running in one form in > 1974. There is information that it ran on PDP 11s as well in another form. > > While searching for information with Google, I found some court > proceedings, including a precedent related to RICO charges on > individuals in Infonet. If anyone finds the original indictment, or can > get to it on pacer, I'd appreciate a copy to read, or send message, I'll > supply the citation. A better source like Pacer probably will retrieve > the original indictment. I only find a decision which was reversed > related to the indictment. I suspect there would be a lot of history in > the indictment around the 1980 ish timeframe of the indictment about how > CSC ran Infonet. > > Short story on what you will find online a lot of spots is a precedent > set by the 4th Circuit of Appeals which resolved a technicality about > whether individuals and corporations were the same WRT charges. The > ruling that RICO applied to individuals and not corporations was filed > by a trial court. But the appeals court said that the actions if they > constituted RICO by individuals could be go back on the corporation they > operated in was the precedent. Obviously not a good one for corporations. > > > > Thanks, > Jim
