www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <hyand...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Recently checked in Windows code
Date Mon, 08 Jun 2009 06:34:33 GMT
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Santiago Gala<santiago.gala@gmail.com> wrote:
> (removed qpid as we drift off-topic for them)
>
> El sáb, 06-06-2009 a las 02:27 -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. escribió:
>> Henri Yandell wrote:
>> > Need to find a good way to add the stupid 'no nuclear facilities'
>> > license clause too.
>>
>>
>> Huh?  Oh - nuclear facilities, not nuclear clauses.
>>
>
> Java used to have this clause which forbid its use for air traffic
> control or operation of nuclear power plants, I don't think they are
> using it any more, and I was not aware of any other use of this clause.
> Are there examples of these clauses "in the wild" anymore?

The air traffic bit was dropped at some point I think, but I still see
the nuclear bit pop up. While Sun had lots of noise of moving to CDDL
and then to CDDL/GPL; they often still release binaries from that
source under whatever pieced together terms their lawyers have come up
with. Generally looking like the BCL license mixed with spec license
pieces.

There is also a BSD-like license from Sun that adds the nuclear
facility clause. I've seen that attached to sample code from Sun.

Hen

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


Mime
View raw message