On 03/01/2012 10:42 AM, Clark Morris wrote:
On 1 Mar 2012 08:21:46 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
17 USC 106: "Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under
this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1)to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
(2)to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;"
quoted from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106
Is anyone here using an IBM mainframe for personal work? The rest of us
work(ed) for companies which probably have legal departements. That is where
this discussion belongs. Or, since mainframes are probably used in some
hospitals and health insurance companies, we can also discuss the virtues and
limitations of self-performed amputations.
Although I am semi-retired (will take contracts) and probably long
past any statute of limitations, I have used as is or modified SAMPLIB
members, placing them in production and in addition I may well have
put said modifications on the MICHMODS, JES3 or CBT tapes. For those
of you still active, not using SAMPLIB members could be a drastic
change in the way things are done. I believe the intent of those
members is that they be used as templates for organizations to
customize the system and that sharing can be a part of that
customization. Since I am fairly certain that there are installations
within IBM and other vendors that have copies of various MODS tapes
and/or their successors, this probably is a non-issue. However, I'm
just a bumped up DOS360 COBOL payroll programmer, not a lawyer.
Clark Morris
Considering what a small percentage of the totality that is z/OS is
represented by SAMPLIB examples and default PARMLIB members, I would be
astonished if even an anal-retentive lawyer would consider quoting with
attribution in another "published" work the unmodified or modified
versions of these members as anything other than "fair use" of z/OS (but
then there are lawyers that surpass anal-retentive).
Considering that IBM advises customers to customize these for their own
use, and that it is in IBM's advantage for customers to have access to
as much assistance and insight from other installations as possible in
that process, it would make no sense for IBM to contest such sharing.
If it were brought to IBM's attention that someone were attempting to
distribute bad mods or other customization examples with the deliberate
intent of tricking IBM customers into compromising their z/OS integrity,
I'm sure IBM would take exception at that; but there surely are other
statutes more potent than copyright infringement that could be brought
to bear at that point.
Joel C Ewing
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)"<[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2012 9:52:04 AM
Subject: Re: Originality (was: Duplicating SYSOUT ...)
In<[email protected]>, on 02/28/2012
at 05:02 PM, Charles Mills<[email protected]> said:
Creating derivative works is a right reserved to the copyright
holder.
In what country? Do you have a citation for the section of the US Code
that prohibits creating, as opposed to distributing or performing, a
copyrighted work?
...
--
Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
