www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Barker" <wbar...@wilshire.com>
Subject Re: Apache Open Letter to Sun, JCK, and how it really affects field of use.
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2007 05:37:28 GMT

"Ralph Goers" <Ralph.Goers@dslextreme.com> wrote in 
message news:46930824.6020201@dslextreme.com...
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> The JCK license is negotiated on a one-time basis between Sun
>> (the Spec Lead) and whatever entity is requesting access to
>> the TCK.  In our case, the offered license is covered with
>> CONFIDENTIAL marks that make it difficult for us to tell you the
>> exact terms. Feel free to ask Sun for a copy.
>>
>> Suffice it to say that that the JCK license (unlike other TCK
>> licenses we have from Sun) proposed a set of field of use
>> restrictions that would apply to any tested implementation as
>> a restriction on downstream users/redistributors of our software.
>> IMO, those terms violate the reciprocal agreements defined by the
>> Java Specification Participation Agreement that all participants
>> in the JCP must sign.
>>
> Well, since you feel that Sun has violated its agreement the ASF could 
> simply ignore the TCK terms and wait for Sun to file a lawsuit. The ASF 
> could then file a counter-claim for the breach of contract. (If you think 
> I actually believe this is a good strategy, think again).
>

Well, no, since that could potentially shutdown the ASF if we lose in court. 
And it is still dependant on the better strategy of finding a law firm to 
take the case pro-bono for the publicity.  Since I'm not on legal@, and 
nobody has suggested it here before, I'm guessing that no firm believes we 
have anything remotely looking like a case.  So that leaves us with the 
options of withdrawing from the JCP (and sending Geronimo and Tomcat to 
whatever new home they can find), or continuing to work within the system, 
where we are making progress.

>> Sun does not need to worry about Apache.  Sun needs to worry about
>> why Apache cannot participate under those terms, since working
>> against public benefit is not a good strategy for any corporation.
> It certainly hasn't hurt Microsoft.
>
> Ralph
>
> 




Mime
View raw message