Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <893364.87946.qm@web53309.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <893364.87946.qm@web53309.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <A774E051-275A-49A8-86A0-397387976C48@gbiv.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Subject: Re: JSR-170 license
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:51:43 -0700
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org

On Jun 20, 2007, at 5:35 PM, Randy Gordon wrote:

> I started writing a JackRabbit Eclipse plugin, and decided to  
> include the JSR-170 javadocs.
>
> As I read the license for the JSR-170  specification on  http:// 
> www.day.com/maven/jsr170/licenses/day-spec-license.htm.
> it seems pretty clear you cannot, under any conditions, use any  
> product implementing a  JSR-170 implementation for other than  
> evaluation uses.
>
> Umm, is this correct?

No.  Read clause 2.

> It really kinda limits the use of Jackrabbit, since it falls under  
> the license as a JSR-170 implementation and, well, I don't mind  
> doing a plugin for the Open Source community, but I draw the line  
> at donating it to a commercial company.

Jackrabbit is under the Apache License.

> As near as I can tell (I am no lawyer) it is viral, it also claims  
> rights to any product that merely uses the JSR-170 specification

No, it is not "viral" in any sense, and cannot claim rights on other
people's software.  What on earth are you reading?  It is the most
liberal of the standard spec licenses allowed by the JSPA.  All JSRs
are implemented under those terms (at best) or far more restrictive
terms.

> However, I did a BI application  for a patent search company a  
> while back, and, learned a little bit about patent squatting.
>
> While this license COULD be interpreted to apply only to the  
> specification itself, the courts tend to take a narrower view.
>
> Finally, I am at a loss as to why why this license is even  
> necessary for a specification that is intended for use by other  
> commercial companies.

The JSPA requires it for compatibility restrictions. Talk to Sun.

> The relevant passages are below:
>
> 1. License for Purposes of Evaluation and Developing Applications.  
> Licensor hereby grants you a fully-paid, non-exclusive, non- 
> transferable, worldwide, limited license (without the right to  
> sublicense), under Licensor's applicable intellectual property  
> rights to view, download, use and reproduce the Specification only  
> for the purpose of internal evaluation. This includes developing  
> applications intended to run on an implementation of the  
> Specification provided  that such applications do not themselves  
> implement any portion(s) of the Specification.

No, that's only the first clause.  Try reading the other clauses.
In any case, that license only applies to the JCR jar file and
javadocs (the specification) distributed by Day.  Apache Jackrabbit
is separate and completely under the Apache License.

....Roy