Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On 06/08/18 13:48, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Frank Cox wrote:
>>>>> so if it would work, replace shortname with short and short1?
>>>
>>> With all of this hokey-pokey surrounding licensing and mac addresses, I
>>> wonder if this outfit is actually still in compliance with the terms of
>>> their license for this software, whatever it may be?
>>>
>>> If the software licensed to run only on Machine X and Machine X has now
>>> been junked and replace by Machine Y, then isn't the solution to
>>> obtain a license for the software for Machine Y or be out-of compliance
>>> regardless of the technical ability to spoof whatever it's looking for?
>
> Frank, I 100% agree with you. The only case with spoofed MAC address and
> license that may have chance to stand in court will be if all below are
> true:
>
> 1. the company issued perpetual license.
> 2. the company does not exist
> 3. the original hardware died (be it motherboard whose embedded NIC
> license was locked to or network card)
> 4. single replacement machine (meeting requirements of license;
> sometimes it is number of CPUs/cores, memory, etc) is used to replace it
> [imminently needing to spoof MAC address]
> 5. fair effort was made to find and notify about the above whoever
> inherited rights of dissolved company
>
> But I bet the lawyer can find flaws in what I tried to say.
Both users' old workstations were at least 6 years old, maybe more. They
got surplused (I'm the one who did that). So it's only on the two machines
that the licenses were for. But.... I assume it was very expensive when
they bought it.
>
> On a similar note: one of the companies whose software scientists here
> were using a lot (IDL is a product) changed hand several times, and last
> owner changed licensing terms and stopped signing perpetual licenses.
> With perpetual license you were able to keep upgrading software during
> support period, usually 1 year, and keep using last version later
> forever only you are locked to that older version. They stopped signing
> perpetual licenses, and made it "software for rent" with 1 year rent
> term. When that happened I recommended all our people to avoid using IDL
> in new projects (python was my recommendation as fair replacement - just
> what I know, not that I consider it better than other alternatives). As
> a programmer (former I should say, as I don't put my dirty hands into
> code lately, almost not) I wouldn't invest my time into mastering
> something that I not necessarily will have access to at some point in a
> future...
Yeah. We have a number of folks here using R, and fewer still using Matlab.
mark
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
