www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wade Chandler <hwadechandler-apa...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] New ASF/JCP Policies
Date Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:27:55 GMT
--- Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com> wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > On 7/9/07, Ralph Goers
> <Ralph.Goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> >> I guess I still don't completely understand.
> Apache code is  
> >> licensed under
> >> the ASL. If I, as an indidual, ran the TCK
> against Harmony and  
> >> announced
> >> to the world that it had passed, why would anyone
> be affected? All  
> >> I have
> >> done is run a utility program against my
> binaries. How can the act of
> >> doing that change the ASL for the rest of the
> world?
> >
> > Running the TCK gives us the magic certification
> which in turn gives
> > the ASF the necessary patent licenses to legally
> redistribute the
> > binaries.  -- justin
> This is a huge concern of mine.  If we believe that
> we can not  
> distribute this code without running the TCK, I
> think this creates  
> all sorts of problems for us.  For example, lots of
> Apache projects  
> "Release" uncertified milestones and snapshots which
> I'm not sure we  
> could do if there was a patent restriction.  The
> biggest issue is  
> downstream recipients of the code.  If they modify
> the code or build  
> from source, they would be using an uncertified
> binary without patent  
> licenses, and I believe that constitutes a
> downstream restriction.   
> My very simple understanding of the ASL doesn't
> allow for such  
> restrictions.

I don't believe this is an issue (unless something in
the TCK license counters this). One can get the
specification and implement it. Also it seems the
specification license mentions passing the TCK, but it
does not expressly define who should run the TCK or
that each and every build (surely just those where
changes took place are concerned) be tested:
"Sun also grants you a perpetual, non-exclusive, 
worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, limited 
license (without the right to sublicense) under any 
applicable copyrights or patent rights it may have in 
the Specification to create and/or distribute an 
Independent Implementation of the Specification that: 
(i) fully implements the Spec(s) including all its 
required interfaces and functionality; (ii) does not 
modify, subset, superset or otherwise extend the 
Licensor Name Space, or include any public or 
protected packages, classes, Java interfaces, fields 
or methods within the Licensor Name Space other than 
those required/authorized by the Specification or 
Specifications being implemented; and (iii) passes the

TCK (including satisfying the requirements of the 
applicable TCK Users Guide) for such Specification. 
The foregoing license is expressly conditioned on your

not acting outside its scope. No license is granted 
hereunder for any other purpose."

Thus, it doesn't even say the person performing the
test should be the actual owner of the TCK nor limit
the sources the TCK can be run against. Now, the TCK
license may have some other restrictions which counter
this, but someone with their hands on that license
would have to definitively answer that one. So, it
seems one can say they implement the specification as
long as it passes the TCK. Passing the TCK is just
passing it unless there is another process where as
the name of the company the source belong, who ran the
test, etc have to also be included and certified.
Again though, this means one has to have the license
and the users guide to know all these things...I don't
have a TCK.


View raw message