At 05:08 PM 8/4/2004, Jerry Fochtman wrote:
>At 03:55 PM 8/4/2004 -0500, Matthew Perdue wrote:
>>John Lee <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >If you alter the SUSAN number in Jan 1, 2007, have you harmed HP?
>> >
>> >John Lee
>>
>>Probably not, other than some small charge that HP may charge for
>>changing a SUSAN number. HP doesn't actually own the SUSAN number, just
>>the software that can change the SUSAN number.
>>
>>Now if you have or someone wants to write, independantly, software that
>>will change the SUSAN number then you or they will own the copyright to
>>that software, not HP - since HP didn't write the new software.
>>
>>Note: John poses a classic law school question, for anyone that's taken
>>courses in technology law. It's a good question. Anyone up for writing
>>software that changes the SUSAN number (without causing a BOO DEAD on
>>boot up)?
>
>Perhaps true, perhaps not.   But if you've done it to defraud some
>organization
>so as to utilize a licensed software product on a system or by an organization
>that it was not originally licensed for you would be subject to litigation
>as well
>as the company to whom the license was originally granted.  Most times the
>terms of a licensing agreement do not stop because support is discontinued
>by either party.   These things boil down to intent...   And just because HP
>chooses to no longer support a product does not mean that the
>product/technology
>become public domain.
>
>And one needs to be cautious, as you may 'own' the computing hardware, but
>only have a right-to-use license for the technology that uses/drives the
>hardware.
>And right-to-use licenses sometimes have clauses concerning tampering or
>reverse-engineering.  Changing the SUSAN would be tampering...
>
>Indeed a grey area and something that would be interesting to hear well-healed
>technology lawyers argue...  Perhaps we can get Eugene to attend and share
>his insight... as I find this evolving area of trade law quite
>facinating... :-)

Practically speaking, it is somewhat academic for all but the few with deep
enough pockets to poke a stick in the bear's eye! There are very few
lawyers who were born well-healed, most of them got that way representing
clients in "interesting legal discussions".
A number of people have felt the suffocating weight of the monstrous HP
legal bear in the past and being right (which is not clear in this case) is
small consolation for the net effect of being rolled over.

Just my humble opinion...   ;]]

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *