www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Hunter <jhun...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Potential Issues in Tomcat codebase
Date Fri, 21 Jan 2005 22:06:45 GMT
One extra and important fact Mark didn't mention:  As soon as the issue 
was raised, I went on the formal record to offer to license the code to 
Apache under an Apache-style license (that includes the required 
attribution of the book where the code came from).  That seemed the 
easiest way to eliminate any gray areas, since the "license" to Sun was 
done informally before I had any knowledge of IP law, while also 
retaining the attribution that I think is proper when borrowing code 
from a book.

It's my position that Apache can do with the code whatever Apache would 
do when integrating code from a third party when the third party code is 
under the Apache 1.1 license.

It's further my position that the removal from Tomcat 5 was unnecessary 
and has resulted in a codebase with reduced functionality.


Mark Thomas wrote:

> It has recently been pointed out that a number of files in the Tomcat 
> codebase (3, 4 & 5) contain the following text.
> <quote>
> This class was originally written by Jason Hunter <jhunter@acm.org>
> as part of the book "Java Servlet Programming" (O'Reilly).
> See http://www.servlets.com/book for more information.
> Used by Sun Microsystems with permission.
> </quote>
> The summary of the history of these files (as I understand it) is:
> - Jason wrote them and put them in his book.
> - Whilst working at Sun, he re-used these files from the Book, granting 
> Sun permission to use them. There was no formal grant, just the comment 
> above in the code.
> - These files were included in the Tomcat code Sun donated to Apache.
> I am looking for answers to the following questions:
> 1. Does this text actually present any issues?
> 2. If so, what are the issues?
> If there are issues, bearing in mind Jason is an Apache member, a Tomcat 
> Committer and has a CLA...
> 3a. What is the minimum change required to the above text to make it 
> acceptable?
> 3b. What other actions are required in addition to any change to the text?
> 4. If the affected classes were re-implemented, what is an acceptable 
> form of words to use in a comment (author tag?) that says "These classes 
> replace those originally written by Jason Hunter <jhunter@acm.org> as 
> part of the book "Java Servlet Programming" (O'Reilly)."
> For background, the TC5 classes have been re-implemented to bypass any 
> potential issue with this text. Please note that I don't want this 
> thread to degenerate into another discussion on the merits of this 
> re-write. Please can we keep it focussed on the legal questions above. 
> Thanks.
> I have yet to do anything with the TC4 classes (and am in no particular 
> rush to do so) as TC4 is on a much slower release cycle.
> Thanks,
> Mark

To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message