www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] New ASF/JCP Policies
Date Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:48:15 GMT
The problem is "and (iii) passes the TCK (including satisfying the  
requirements of the applicable TCK Users Guide) for such  
Specification".  I think that the full text is effectually saying,  
"we'll give you the copyrights and patents (that we can) as long as  
the code passes the TCK".  The problem is that getting a TCK is not  
easy and without acquiring a TCK license from the owner you do not  
have the rights to execute derivative the code.  In the past, people  
have said that "if you don't pass the TCK you simply can't call it  
Java" (or what every the brand is), but I believe this text is saying  
"without the TCK you don't have a license for the IP required to  
execute the code".

So, if a TCK is required to obtain the IP necessary to legally  
execute the code, and a TCK can cost money, I think we have an  
additional restrictions beyond the ASL.


On Jul 11, 2007, at 12:27 PM, Wade Chandler wrote:

> --- 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.
> Wade

View raw message