harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geir Magnusson Jr <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: NDA issues and acceptable use of sun source
Date Mon, 13 Feb 2006 00:23:11 GMT

Leo Simons wrote:
> Vorbis is cool :-)
> Thanks for thinking this stuff through and being careful about protecting
> everyone and yourself from legal mess.
> IANAL. Not Legal Advice.
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 12:08:20AM +0100, Tor-Einar Jarnbjo wrote:
>>> Which code, and what were the terms of the NDA?  The CLA is fairly 
>>> lightwieght.
>> Good questions, I honestly don't know. Working as a Java developer, I 
>> now and then need to trace into the original source code or take a look 
>> or two at the API implementation to realize why something is not working 
>> as I expect. As far as I can remember, I have not done this with Sun's 
>> JavaSound implementation.
> If you put a notice to that effect onto your authorized contributor form
> that should probably be fine. If you can't remember what bit of the
> implementation you looked at, chances are you also don't remember what you
> saw! Sun has repeatedly and publicly stated that this kind of usage should
> not "taint" a developer.

I'm not so sure - the fact that there's been that exposure under NDA 
means there can be no contribution in that area until the NDA problem is 

>> I don't have the NDA anymore, or am at least 
>> not able to find it, having moved around several times the last ten 
>> years.
> Chances are that the NDA is either
>  * expired, or
>  * voided
> Since the JDK stuff is now all mostly out in the public, and most NDAs
> are effectively voided once the information they are meant to protect is
> available through other means not involving an NDA.

That is a possible out.

> If you want to be certain, you can probably get in touch with sun legal
> and figure out if the NDA still applies, and to what. I would hope *they*
> still have a copy somewhere...
>> For working on a JavaSound implementation, it is probably 
>> irrelevant anyway, as JavaSound was not introduced until Java 1.3 and 
>> ought not to be covered by any agreement in Sun's NDA.
> That sounds sensible. Based on the situation you have outlined in your
> emails, I don't think we should have a problem integrating your stuff
> and having you work on it here. I for sure will get pissed if this would
> get us into any kind of trouble and be happy to throw some ASF legal
> cycles at getting justice! :-)

If what you were exposed to under the NDA has no tie to what you are 
offering, then the NDA is irrelevant for this.  For other things, you 
still have a problem, but if you've never seen Sun code in and around 
the sound API, then you are fine.


View raw message