Dodgy Genera binaries are one thing - pirate Genera source could be poison. Any future project to implement anything resembling a Lisp Machine* might be vulnerable to accusations that the contributors had taken advantage of it. Reading or downloading or disseminating or advertising it seems like a Really Bad Idea to me. Though the article suggests that "the current legal status of the IP around the Lisp Machines is unclear", it seems that there's at least one institution with (at the very least) a good chance of vindicating proprietary claims to a large part of Genera in court - new Symbolics: http://www.symbolics.com
* Quite loosely, perhaps. For example, I don't think that "but my persistent, dynamic runtime doesn't implement Lisp!" is necessarily going to be a sterling defence against claims that it swiped architectural details from Genera.
Agreed that there are risks here. I'd be interested to hear from anyone with specific knowledge of the Symbolics situation -- my email address is patrick#collison#ie. I've tried to contact David Schmidt (the listed contact at symbolics.com) a few times, but without success.
Note, though, that Symbolics machines shipped with the source code (I own one, and have been reading and editing bits and pieces for quite a while). Using this emulated version of Genera is pretty much an orthogonal issue: to the extent that reading the Symbolics source causes IP issues, you're just as screwed if you read it legally.
Hm, I think my IANAL reflex didn't trigger strongly enough when I was writing my original comment. But I still believe it's a Good Idea to play safe until broader legal fallout is definitively ruled out one way or another. After all, once the genie escapes the bottle it's not going back in no matter what the consequences turn out to be.
> to the extent that reading the Symbolics source causes IP issues, you're just as screwed if you read it legally.
Very likely, but I wouldn't bet my life on it. Partly because - well, if there is a plausible impression that Project Foo's shiny new VM is based on their study of other people's old code that they gleefully pirated all over the intertubes, then they're practically begging a judge to put together some interpretation of the law under which to hammer them. Ask Corley what being technically in the right guarantees you under those circumstances.
((( No KLAXON needed here, just try it out privately, because the only way to have some kind of possible resurrection of these beautiful machines is gettingyourhandsonit, don't you think? )))
Dodgy Genera binaries are one thing - pirate Genera source could be poison. Any future project to implement anything resembling a Lisp Machine* might be vulnerable to accusations that the contributors had taken advantage of it. Reading or downloading or disseminating or advertising it seems like a Really Bad Idea to me. Though the article suggests that "the current legal status of the IP around the Lisp Machines is unclear", it seems that there's at least one institution with (at the very least) a good chance of vindicating proprietary claims to a large part of Genera in court - new Symbolics: http://www.symbolics.com
* Quite loosely, perhaps. For example, I don't think that "but my persistent, dynamic runtime doesn't implement Lisp!" is necessarily going to be a sterling defence against claims that it swiped architectural details from Genera.