DOS ain't dead - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ?

may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? (Developers)

posted by Rugxulo , Usono, 03.04.2011, 01:22

> >> copyright db "(c) 1990, 1991 Ziff Communications Co.",10,13
> >> author db "PC Magazine ",254," Douglas Boling"
>
> > I don't know the status of Ziff Davis, and I'm no lawyer. I know they
> > forbid redistribution since a long time (re:
>
> Yeah, I heard that too. OTOH many many repositories carry their utilities,
> apparently without fear of reprisals, and I mean serious looking places,
> not the typical "war3z" house :=)

Well, most people aren't legally minded (nor me), which is why a lot of corners get cut. We shouldn't have to be so strict with each other, IMHO.

> > Garbo).

BTW, make sure to read this link, though I'm not sure it's very definitive anymore. But it'll give you some background history, at least.

> It used to be by subscription I think. I don' know, either, if Ziff or
> some successor entity still actively tries to sell those old proggies.
> Considering the state of DOS in 2011, it could be a costly operation for
> little benefit ;=)

Yet people do still sell DOS software in plenty of places (e.g. Gog.com), just not as a primary source of income, usually.

> > In any case, you're probably only safe NOT publishing binaries but
> instead
> > binary patches (debug scripts) and/or non-context diffs, IMHO.
>
> I'm grateful for your advice.

It's just random advice, not necessarily the best.

> To be sure I don't misunderstand, what do
> you call "non-context" diffs, please ?

"diff -c" is context (preferred by *BSD ??), "diff -u" is unified (preferred by GNU). Traditionally you'd use "diff" without either option for "normal" output, but it makes it harder if you have slight changes in the original or try merging several changes at once. (Actually, diff predates Larry Wall's patch by quite a few years. Originally I think it outputted a script for ed.) I mean, honestly, I don't personally think context diffs should be copyright infringement, but to be ultra conservative and cautious (since some people are extremely litigious), I would avoid it anyways.

Post reply

Complete thread:

may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Ninho, 01.04.2011, 20:19 (Developers)
- may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Laaca, 02.04.2011, 09:29
  - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Ninho, 02.04.2011, 10:41
    - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Rugxulo, 02.04.2011, 20:11
      - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Ninho, 02.04.2011, 23:55
        may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Rugxulo, 03.04.2011, 01:22
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - ecm, 03.04.2011, 01:30
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - Ninho, 04.04.2011, 13:33
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - Khusraw, 04.04.2011, 14:02
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - Ninho, 04.04.2011, 17:56
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - Khusraw, 04.04.2011, 19:28
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - Ninho, 05.04.2011, 13:42
        diffs to non-free source code, copyright infringement? - Khusraw, 06.04.2011, 12:46
        may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Ninho, 04.04.2011, 13:03
      - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Arjay, 21.05.2011, 09:14
- may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Khusraw, 03.04.2011, 09:52
  - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - RayeR, 04.04.2011, 00:46
    - may I publish fixes to utilities such as PC Magazine's ? - Ninho, 04.04.2011, 18:03