www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Couple of legal questions about Apache POI 3.7
Date Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:31:05 GMT

INAL, but I am a member of the Apache POI PMC. I think your questions were missed on the project
dev list. Sorry for that.

(1) The OSP was debated when the project chose to begin implementation of OOXML. Microsoft
was involved indirectly and then more directly. Please see this press release:


You and your lawyers will need to decide, but I do know that there are large government users
of POI who are also Office licensees. There has been co-operation between POI and MSFT over
a few file format issues over the years.

(2) The original checkin for the Binary Tree was nearly 11 years ago.


Someone on this list will need to comment if ICLAs were used at that time, but the assumption
is that Andrew Oliver had the rights to make the contribution of Marc Johnson's code. These
two were the original authors.

Legal-discuss subscribers please add what's needed here.


On Jan 22, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Srinivas Dorairaj wrote:

> Cross posting here as did not get a response from POI Developers mailing list (dev@poi.apache.org)

> --------- 
> We have been successfully using Apache POI in our product for several years now and have
been thankful for the wonderful work that the POI team does.  Recently our legal team raised
a couple of concerns that we hope the developers on this list may be able to answer and help
us continue to use POI: 
> 1.  In the file BinaryTree.java ( http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/poi/tags/REL_3_7/src/java/org/apache/poi/util/BinaryTree.java?revision=1022461&view=co
), there are a 3 locations in the source where the comments say 'Based on Sun's TreeMap implementation,
though it's barely recognizable anymore'.  Our legal team has concerns that some of this code
may have been derived from some version of Oracle/Sun Java original code.  Would someone in
the POI team be able to shed some light on this?  Our hope is that this is original Apache
code clear of any contribution from external sources! 
> 2.  In the LICENSE file, we found the information about the OOXML schemas and Microsoft's
Open Specification Promise (OSP).  There was a question raised whether the POI constitutes
a 'Covered Implementation' under the terms of the MS OSP legal language below: 
> "Microsoft irrevocably promises not to assert any Microsoft Necessary Claims against
you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing or distributing any implementation
to the extent it conforms to a Covered Specification (“Covered Implementation”), subject
to the following. " 
> Again, thanks for all the hard work and effort that has been put into this package. 
We would really appreciate a response. 
> Thanks 
> Srini 

View raw message