IRIX 6.5 License question
Ion-X
IRIX 6.5. From what I understand, if I were to go through SGI to get the
software it would cost far more than the computer is worth. I have seen
several auctions on Ebay for IRIX at pretty reasonable prices, but most of
them have a disclaimer stating that I would still be responsible a license.
Would something like this still install and operate without contacting SGI
for a license?
Please help this poor student!!! :-)
Ion-X
Walter Roberson
Ion-X <matri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:I have just come across an old Indy and I was thinking about upgrading to
It would install and operate.
Please note that if you are in the United States and you use
a computer program without a license, then the potential penalties
are fairly harsh -- potentially years in jail, and potentially
fines greater than you are likely to make in your lifetime. Note
further that *in law*, each time you reboot the system is another
"count", as is each backup copy you take. Each "count" can incur
penalties at least as high as the original charge.
If I understand correctly the summaries I have seen, then if you are in
California then installing the program from hard disk and booting twice
would, *in law*, constitute enough felonies to invoke the "Three
Strikes" sentancing provisions, thus in theory being enough to
send you to prison for "life". [I haven't read the details of that
law myself: it might not come into effect unless you have at least
one charge involving violence.]
I have seen no indication that SGI would persue that level of penalties
for private copying, but it doesn't really matter what SGI thinks: US
Copyright law is part of the criminal code, meaning that copyright
violations are not considered to be matters between you and the
offended rights holder, but are instead considered to be matters
between you and the State -- so you could be charged by any public
prosecutor without SGI having had any input on the matter at all.
Michael de la Fuente
than going after people using software without a license...just a
thought....
robe...@ibd.nrc.ca (Walter Roberson) wrote in message news:<aa6jpj$s9f$1...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>...
Walter Roberson
Michael de la Fuente <mike...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:Hopefully the FBI have their attention on getting Bin Laden rather
:than going after people using software without a license...just a
:thought....
Isn't the FBI restricted to domestic cases (and foreign intelligence
related directly to domestic US situations) ? Has there been an indication
that Bin Laden is in the United States?
In other words, once the FBI determined that Bin Laden was the
responsible party, responsibility for locating him outside of the USA
would have transfered to the US military or CIA, I think -- thus
leaving the FBI free to work on the urgent economic issue of "software
piracy" that according to some reports is costing US business more in
lost revenues than the value of the economies of most "second world"
countries.
(It reportedly is also responsible for the US's slipping technical
dominance of the planet, the rise of liberalism, the failure of
traditional religions, the increase in UFO sightings, the propensity
for obesity amongst our youths -- and also for the very
existance of Jar-Jar Binks.)
Ion-X
make a decision.
I guess this would all be avoided if SGI would offer a student license for
their out of production workstations!
You do have to learn IRIX somehow, right?
Ion-x
"Michael de la Fuente" <mike...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7f0efdca.02042...@posting.google.com...
Jim Light
> Ion-X <matri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> :I have just come across an old Indy and I was thinking about upgrading to
> :IRIX 6.5. From what I understand, if I were to go through SGI to get the
> :software it would cost far more than the computer is worth. I have seen
> :several auctions on Ebay for IRIX at pretty reasonable prices, but most of
> :them have a disclaimer stating that I would still be responsible a license.
> :Would something like this still install and operate without contacting SGI
> :for a license?
>
> It would install and operate.
>
>
> Please note that if you are in the United States and you use
> a computer program without a license, then the potential penalties
> are fairly harsh -- potentially years in jail, and potentially
> fines greater than you are likely to make in your lifetime. Note
> further that *in law*, each time you reboot the system is another
> "count", as is each backup copy you take. Each "count" can incur
> penalties at least as high as the original charge.
Interesting. So if one is convicted of such a crime, how would the law
actually "count" the number of times the software had been used?
Arthur Corliss
>
>Interesting. So if one is convicted of such a crime, how would the law
>actually "count" the number of times the software had been used?
;-) Are you assuming the law would be logical? Just because it's
technically allowed doesn't mean they're technically "able". . .
--
--Arthur Corliss
Bolverk's Lair -- http://arthur.corlissfamily.org/
Digital Mages -- http://www.digitalmages.com/
"Live Free or Die, the Only Way to Live" -- NH State Motto
Michael de la Fuente
like copyright issues. ever rent a movie and before the movie they
have that stupid FBI warning saying some crap about you are not
allowed to copy this tape/dvd and resell it or reuse it without paying
the rightful owners..yada yada yada....get what i mean?? same thing
applies to the software sector.....so again hopefully the FBI is more
focused on Bin Laden and his crew instead of some person using a
secondhand copy of IRIX......just a thought..
-Mike
deja...@yahoo.com (Jim Light) wrote in message news:<99b851b.02042...@posting.google.com>...
Hardin
be unable to run without a license. Specifically, I don't believe you can
use any of he SGI complilers - or their software development packages -
straight out of the box.
"Walter Roberson" <robe...@ibd.nrc.ca> wrote in message
news:aa6jpj$s9f$1...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca...
Walter Roberson
Michael de la Fuente <mike...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:The FBI has jurisdiction in prosecuting software licensing issues just
:like copyright issues.
Question: does the FBI still have jurisdiction when the software
manufacturer and the copyright violator are in the same state?
Is the FBI's jurisdiction not derived from the fact that the FBI
covers US Federal crimes, and anything that crosses state boundaries
is considered Federal jurisdiction? If so, then if the copier were
in the same state as the rights holder, would it not be a matter for
state police?
:so again hopefully the FBI is more
:focused on Bin Laden and his crew instead of some person using a
:secondhand copy of IRIX......just a thought..
Does the FBI now have jurisdiction to be tracking Bin Laden, as there
are no serious allegations that Bin Laden is in the United States?
Isn't it the CIA's mandate to deal with extra-territorial matters?
Yes, the FBI would still be deeply involved in the cases of those
thousands of people who have been arrested in the US but not charged for
several months (or charged only with immigration violations but still
held as if they are terrorists), but do they have the jurisdiction
to be persuing Bin Laden *himself* ?
In any case, my understanding (perhaps incorrect) is that the
copyright violation charges can be laid by any public prosecutor.
If a public prosecutor should happen to come by "information"
then they could, I understand, proceed. The FBI would be involved
at the level of formal investigations to determine which unknown
person(s) was(were) involved in copyright violations, but once
a particular individual is incriminated, it doesn't have to be the
FBI that takes the case, I believe.
Michael Rice
operate without a license/activation key. However, you are still
obligated to acquire the appropriate licenses.
Although the SGI IRIX compilers are not part of the base IRIX CD set,
they will install and operate without a license. However, the C, C++,
and FORTRAN compilers will display a "nag" screen (about 30 lines of
"contact your local SGI rep to get a license" type text) for each file
that is compiled.
The SGI debugger 'cvd' will not operate without a license installed. If
you are going to be compiling with the MIPSpro compilers and you
want/need to use a debugger, then you need 'cvd'. IIRC, you can't use
'gdb' with executables generated by MIPSpro compilers (maybe this is
only for C++?).
However, for many applications the GCC is fine. And, when combined with
GDB and DDD, it can be a pretty productive development environment.
Tie it all up with a really good editor (like my fav SlickEdit) and
you've got yourself a pretty sweet environment.
Michael
Ruud van Gaal
<Michae...@adelphia.net> wrote:
...
>Although the SGI IRIX compilers are not part of the base IRIX CD set,
>they will install and operate without a license. However, the C, C++,
>and FORTRAN compilers will display a "nag" screen (about 30 lines of
>"contact your local SGI rep to get a license" type text) for each file
>that is compiled.
Seems this doesn't work anymore after 2-3 years (?). I once had a
compiler I think on a client's machine that had CC, but recently
(after a couple of years) I tried running it but it wouldn't.
>The SGI debugger 'cvd' will not operate without a license installed. If
>you are going to be compiling with the MIPSpro compilers and you
>want/need to use a debugger, then you need 'cvd'. IIRC, you can't use
>'gdb' with executables generated by MIPSpro compilers (maybe this is
>only for C++?).
I use 'dbx', which is supplied with the MIPSpro compilers. Doesn't
need any (extra) license.
Ruud van Gaal
Free car sim: http://www.racer.nl/
Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/
Michael de la Fuente
without the debuggers????
ru...@marketgraph.nl (Ruud van Gaal) wrote in message news:<3cca3a07....@news.xs4all.nl>...
Michael Rice
separate product requiring a separate license key.
As mentioned below, you can also use 'dbx' for debugging. It's actually
quite useful for some things - like getting a quick stack trace from a
core file.
Walter Roberson
Jim Light <deja...@yahoo.com> wrote:
|robe...@ibd.nrc.ca (Walter Roberson) wrote in message news:<aa6jpj$s9f$1...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>...
| Please note that if you are in the United States and you use
|> a computer program without a license, then the potential penalties
|> are fairly harsh -- potentially years in jail, and potentially
|> fines greater than you are likely to make in your lifetime. Note
|> further that *in law*, each time you reboot the system is another
|> "count", as is each backup copy you take. Each "count" can incur
|> penalties at least as high as the original charge.
|Interesting. So if one is convicted of such a crime, how would the law
|actually "count" the number of times the software had been used?
Each backup tape that they could find would be a "copy". If the
prosecutors are trying to "nail your ass" [e.g., you are caught up
in a "hacker" sweep such as the E911 case or Operation Sundevil
where it is considered important to demonstrate that you
are an Evil Person Dedicated To Bringing Down The Country As We Know It],
then the prosecutors might try for one "count" per backup image.
The defence in such a situation would of course argue about who
actually caused each of the backups to be made, trying to reduce the
number of counts the defendant was found liable for, but the prosecution
would "fling mud" in hopes that as much of it as possible would stick
[e.g., because the defence didn't happen to think of avenues of
discrediting the evidence.]
Similarily, if you happen to have configured availmon or the newer
ESP subsystem, then your system might have a log of all the boot times
and boot reasons for the last several years. The prosecution would
then argue that each boot represented an illegal "copying" of
the protected information, again in hopes that the judge/jury would
accept a high "count". The defence would argue about things like
power-failures not being voluntary copies, the prosecution would
counter-argue that it doesn't matter that you didn't specifically
trigger that copying because you -did- configure your system to
autoboot on power-resumption and thus are responsible for any copying
that happens to occur, etc., etc.
If you do not happen to have availmon or esp recording your boot times,
but you do have backups, then the prosecutors could troll through
the backed up wtmp/wtmpx files looking for boot records,
or backed up SYSLOG's looking for evidence of boots...
SO... one could take the attitude that the FBI and public prosecutors
have "better things to do" than to go after small-time copying,
but it is important to remember that prosecution is, *in practice*,
very tied up in politics and public policy. If, for example,
you happen to be a Muslim immigrant (or 2nd generation, or actively
practicing), then under the current US situation, you could find
yourself under investigation because you happened to have met
someone else that the authorities are interested in, or because
some member of your extended family is doing something that
the authorities are interested in. Or maybe your family is from
China or Taiwan or from Cuba or Central America or any of the trouble
spots in Africa... or perhaps someone in your after-work
pick-up basketball games gets nabbed with some joints on them and
alleges that it's "pretty common" amongst the players.
There are all kinds of reasons these days why one might find oneself
under investigation. Your PlayDog subscription might be embarrasing,
as might be your complete collection of Donny & Marie videotapes,
and that snapshot of you penciling in the moustache on the election
poster might get you a misdemeanor, but unless you have a
pirate satellite card, probably the harshest [in law] single thing
that could be pinned on you would be software copyright violation.
For whatever reason, US law considers copyright violation to be a
serious offence, worse than punching someone without provocation, or
shoplifting a pair of jeans, or allowing your industrial plant to emit
any of a number of toxic chemicals. No matter whether you personally
agree that that *should* be the case, if you are contemplating using
software without a proper license, you need to be aware of what the
risks are. And yup, *most* copying will never ever be noticed... the
problem is that if it -does- get noticed then there is a non-trivial
possibility that the offence will get leveraged into an outright
personal disaster. :(
Michael de la Fuente
enforcement have enough to worry abut with terrorists, drug dealers,
rapists, etc etc....unless you are copying it and reselling it, SGI or
the federal authorities won't waste their breath on some lone user
installing a copy of IRIX they got secondhand....lawyers for SGI
charge, i would guess, about $350 to $400 an hour to do their dirty
legal work....and it is expensive in the US for a federal district
attorney to proesecute this type of case...trust me....they have other
things to do....
robe...@ibd.nrc.ca (Walter Roberson) wrote in message news:<aaepoc$q3p$1...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>...
yi ge mei you er duo
> I wouldn't worry about using software without a license....law
> enforcement have enough to worry abut with terrorists, drug dealers,
> rapists, etc etc....unless you are copying it and reselling it, SGI or
> the federal authorities won't waste their breath on some lone user
> installing a copy of IRIX they got secondhand....lawyers for SGI
> charge, i would guess, about $350 to $400 an hour to do their dirty
> legal work....and it is expensive in the US for a federal district
> attorney to proesecute this type of case...trust me....they have other
> things to do....
In theory ... but in fact, this is the Third Reich method of Law Enforcement.
First make everyone a "criminal." Then prosecute a few "criminals" to the
fullest extent of the "law." (If you know anything at all about copyright you
know that the United States' official position on "intellectual property" is
pure bullshit.) Now we have the majority of the country terrified to behave
in a manner that six weeks ago was accepted and normal with absolutely
no input from the 'democratically' ruled populace. Buy off a few legislators
(it's allegedly cheaper to do this in Washington, D.C. than in Djakarta, btw)
and you can change the character of a whole society overnight.
As Adolf Hitler said, "What luck for governments, that men don't think !"
Walter Roberson
:enforcement have enough to worry abut with terrorists, drug dealers,
:rapists, etc etc....unless you are copying it and reselling it, SGI or
:the federal authorities won't waste their breath on some lone user
:installing a copy of IRIX they got secondhand....lawyers for SGI
:charge, i would guess, about $350 to $400 an hour to do their dirty
:legal work....
Lawyers for SGI would not be very involved in criminal copyright
violation cases. Criminal law, remember: that means that it's
the State versus the defendant, not the Rights Holder versus
the defendant.
:and it is expensive in the US for a federal district
:attorney to proesecute this type of case...
But these cases have a very high payback. The major effort is in
proving that the rights holder was not paid for the software. Once
that is established, the "count" can be racked up quickly, and
the fines and jail terms *start* quite high.
In other words, if you -happen- to get into a situation where
the prosecution is looking for *something* to pin on you, then
copyright violation could easily ruin you. How often is the prosecution
looking for *something* to pin on people? The "War on Terror" has
somewhat changed the frequency (or at least the obviousness) of that.
:trust me....they have other
:things to do....
No offence, Michael, but I haven't yet seen anything in your
arguments that gives me the confidence to "trust" your assertions.
Do you wish to present additional evidence or reasoning, or do
you wish to give "inside" information based on your own experience or
the experience of people you trust implicitly [e.g., your siblings] ?
Jim Light
Hmmm... I'm impressed and I like your pinko attitude. Most people who
quote Hitler in that manner have read "Mein Kampf". A very heavy book!
Michael de la Fuente
I assume you are from Canada? If so, law here in the US is different.
This will be prosecuted by the US federal govt, not any state
prosecutors. This is common knowledge, no offense, because copyright
laws are overseen by the Federal govt...ask anyone who is a lawyer in
the US. And SGI would be involved only if you are reselling and
copying software for retail, or giving it away because:
you copying software and selling it = lost revenue for SGI
however:
you buying SGI software off of E-bay and not buying a license for it
and using it for your own use = SGI not even lifting a finger to track
you down
Plain and simple, money makes the decision whether to prosecute you,
not ethics or morals when dealing with the business side of things.
I took 2 semesters of business law and we touched in depth on consumer
and trade law. However if anyone has more info on this, i would be
glad to hear it. It is kind of interesting to see what really would be
the outcome of somebody getting nabbed for using a copy of IRIX
secondhand....
robe...@ibd.nrc.ca (Walter Roberson) wrote in message news:<aahvnt$f6v$1...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>...
yi ge mei you er duo
>
>
> Hmmm... I'm impressed and I like your pinko attitude.
Pinko ? PINKO ? Look here sonnyboy, I'm a jen-yoo-wine
full-fledged Red ! A Commie rat, even. Remember that we
will bury you! (If I can ever find my other shoe :)
( Actually, they probably already have. I was looking for
some poly-V belts today. Nobody, but *nobody* in this area
had any in stock ... but looking on the web I found they
had what I wanted in Shanghai on the shelf. Just who is
the third-world country around here ? Want service ? Can't
get it in the US. Want goods ? Can't get them in the US,
unless what you want is $100 knit shirts with alligators
on them. Want hi-tech ? It's not made here, is it ? How
about vegetables ? Seems like they're mostly coming from
Mexico now ... guess it's time to start selling life
insurance. "Service economy" - isn't that like when they
had those darkly-complected people out in the fields
picking cotton ? )
kempo master
i bet if someone used irix for evil... we'd all be suspect...
we're are after all - a minority group... (a damned cool minority)
...to date... to my knowledge (which is vast, precise, accurate and quite clear),
there have been no cases in the united states where a hobbyist has been prosecuted for
purchasing, copying, and or using an irix distribution obtained from ebay or from
anyone else for that matter.
calm yourselves...
behave...
don't use irix for evilness
i'd be willing to bet osama doesn't have an sgi box of any sort
unless those notebook ones in jurassic park were real.
Jim Light
>
> we're are after all - a minority group... (a damned cool minority)
>
> ...to date... to my knowledge (which is vast, precise, accurate and quite clear),
> there have been no cases in the united states where a hobbyist has been prosecuted for
> purchasing, copying, and or using an irix distribution obtained from ebay or from
> anyone else for that matter.
>
> calm yourselves...
>
> behave...
>
> don't use irix for evilness
>
> i'd be willing to bet osama doesn't have an sgi box of any sort
> unless those notebook ones in jurassic park were real.
Well that's quite obvious. They wouldn't lose that much revenue if
some hobbyist uses irix without a lic, since most of their income
depends on large gov't and academic institutions.... and don't forget
hollywood.