www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] New ASF/JCP Policies
Date Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:16:18 GMT

On Jul 15, 2007, at 2:17 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> On 7/14/07, Ralph Goers <Ralph.Goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> by somebody to really be "Java".  However, I'm really not sure why  
>> that
>> somebody has to be Apache.
>
> My opinion based on my reading of the JSPA (looking at 2.0.1 - 10
> January 2005), we have to be the ones to certify since we signed the
> JSPA which says that we will not release any code that doesn't pass
> the TCK - see specifically 5b ("License to Create Independent
> Implementations").
>
> Unless we have another license grant for the specification (and in
> some particular cases we have agreements that supersede the JSR
> specification licenses), the only way for us to legally implement the
> spec - since we are a signatory to the JSPA - is to adhere to those
> terms: a) fully implement, b) do not modify, etc; and c) pass the TCK.

This is why what Sun is doing w/ the JCK license is so nasty, and why  
the JCP needs to be fixed.

The TCK license breaks any chance of "ex ante" IP policy at the JCP  
because there's no disclosure requirement.  The implementor works in  
good faith under the terms of the spec license, only to discover that  
later, the spec lead can control how they distribute their software.

The irony is that Sun is a very vocal and active proponent of ex ante  
IP disclosure

   http://mailman.ctyme.com/pipermail/openstds/2007-April/000109.html
   http://www.amc.gov/comments/sunmicrosystems.pdf
   etc..

:)

geir


Mime
View raw message