Copyright

[mad...@vijit.com]

Copyright can be complex; I think it would be a mistake to assume that they
are expired for the 1130.

A) When I write something now, it's automatically copyrighted. Back then,
you had to take positive action to claim copyright. I would suspect that
IBM's legal department would have been on top of that. :-)

B) Copyrights may be renewed. I don't know what the current limit is, but
it keeps getting longer, "thanks" to the efforts of companies like Disney
who obviously never want to see The Mouse's copyright expire.
IBM may automatically renew all the copyrights they ever had up to whatever
limit there is. This would protect all their IP and give them the flexibility
to re-license materials under whatever terms they want at the time.

C) This problem is aggravated further because each piece of a combined work
may have its own copyright (and potential licensing terms). Think of PTFs.
(Think of Linux. Each piece is copyright by its author although everything
is licensed by GPL2).


There are a few ways to approach this:

1) Ignore the copyright and hope that the copyright holder doesn't think it
worthwhile to go after you. Somehow, I think that IBM's legal department
probably has bigger fish to fry than going after us aging 1130'ers. :-)
(But, of course, you never know).

2) Get official clearance for use from IBM legal or their word that the
work is in public domain. However, asking a corporate lawyer to focus his
attention on something you're doing or want to do is usually Not A Good Plan,
because lawyers NEVER say, "Sure, go ahead, have a nice time!".
And regarding the 1130, we'd probably all be buried before any legal review
actually happened, because it's not likely to be a high priority at IBM.

3) Claim a Fair Use exemption (for education, criticism, etc).

4) Use the copyrighted materials under the licensing terms that IBM
granted. I know nothing about those terms, maybe someone else can comment.

5) It's also possible (in theory, at least) to verify the copyright status
of each copyrighted work to see if it's in public domain or not.
I believe this to be a non-trivial effort.


My guess is that using (3) and maybe (4) is probably the way to go, but that
most people will take a chance on (1). Obviously, (4) is safest if the
expected use of the materials falls within the license.

There are many potentially copyrighted materials here, ranging from manuals
to program listings to logic diagrams, and all may have different copyrights
and licensing terms.

Perhaps someone who has actually done more than the "armchair guessing" that
I'm doing has better information -- I hope so!

[Al Kossow]

It is MUCH easier to get permission to use software for non-commercial / hobbyist use
if you can find someone with the power to do so in the company you're dealing with.

People complain a LOT that the sources CHM gets permission to release aren't put in
the public domain. It is EXTREMELY difficult to get a corporate lawyer to agree to that,
it's merely difficult in the restricted-use case.