Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 04:16:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Henri Yandell (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12684825.1387127953000.151949.1456460178224@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12684825.1387127953000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12684825.1387127953000@Atlassian.JIRA>
 <JIRA.12684825.1387127953163@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Closed] (LEGAL-186) Can PMCs continue to use existing
 expired TCKs?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Henri Yandell closed LEGAL-186.
-------------------------------

> Can PMCs continue to use existing expired TCKs?
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-186
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-186
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Jim Jagielski
>
> Background
> ==========
> This question has been moved to legal-discuss@ at the request of the VP,
> Legal.
> Between June 2002 and June 2012 the ASF licensed a number of TCKs from
> Sun/Oracle. The agreement can be found in svn[1]. It includes a number
> of amendments which added additional TCKs to the agreement and/or
> extended the license from its original expiration date. It also includes
> a side-letter that modifies some terms of the agreement.
> Neither Oracle nor the ASF have a complete copy of the agreement. A
> number of amendments have been lost. It is believed that those
> amendments were adding additional TCKs to the license but this is not
> certain.
> When the agreement expired, Oracle and the ASF started to negotiate a
> new agreement. The terms offered by Oracle were not acceptable. Attempts
> to negotiate terms agreeable to the ASF have not been successful and it
> is now judged to be unlikely that Oracle would ever offer terms that
> would be acceptable to the ASF.
> Question
> ========
> I have read the agreement several times and - on the basis that the
> agreement has expired and will not be renewed - it is not clear to me
> whether or not PMCs that previously ran the TCK while the agreement was
> in place are able to continue to run the TCK. Further, if PMCs are still
> able to run the TCK in limited circumstances it is not clear to me what
> those circumstances are.
> My question is therefore this:
> Under what circumstances, if any, may PMCs continue to use TCKs that
> were licensed under the above agreement?
> My own analysis
> ===============
> I think that the license has expired rather than been terminated so
> section 10.3 applies but section 10.4 doesn't.
> Section 10.3 states:
> "10.3 Effect of Expiration. Upon expiration of this Agreement, Licensee
> shall be authorized to: (a) distribute Product(s) successfully
> self-certified against the version of the TCK licensed hereunder at the
> time of expiration, subject to Licensee's continued compliance with this
> Agreement including the payment of any applicable fees, and (b) retain
> one (1) copy of the TCK to support customers having copies of Product(s)
> distributed by Licensee prior to the expiration hereof. All other rights
> of Licensee shall terminate upon such expiration."
> The term "support" as used in the above paragraph is not defined (as far
> as I can tell) in the agreement. Does support include testing new point
> releases? For example, Tomcat 7.0.0 was tested with the Servlet TCK when
> the agreement was in force. A number of further point releases (up to
> 7.0.27) were made while the agreement was in force. Does section 10.3
> give us permission to test all 7.0.x releases after 7.0.27 with the
> Servlet TCK? It seems unlikely that we'd be allowed to continuing using
> the TCK yet, if 10.3 doesn't give us permission to use continue using
> the TCK, what permission does it give us as that is really the only
> permission worth having.
> The agreement is quite long and there may well be other sections that
> apply that I haven't read and/or understood correctly so some advice
> from someone with more legal knowledge would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Mark
> [1]
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/foundation/Correspondence/JCP/ApacheScholarship


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

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