www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marvin Humphrey (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-298) Is SCSL 3.0 license acceptable?
Date Sat, 15 Apr 2017 01:42:42 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-298?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15969773#comment-15969773

Marvin Humphrey commented on LEGAL-298:

The SCSL is not an Open Source license, and has never been represented as one by Sun, it's
author.  Consider the Executive Summary from the SCSL rationale document _Sun Community Source
License Principles_ by Richard P. Gabriel and Bill Joy:


Community Source creates a community of widely available software source code just as does
the Open Source model, but with two significant differences requested by our licensees, as

* compatibility among deployed versions of the software is required and enforced through testing
* proprietary modifications and extensions including performance improvements are allowed

These important differences and other details make Community Source a powerful combination
of the best of the proprietary licensing and the more contemporary open source technology
licensing models.

Section II of the SCSL 3.0 explicitly forbids commercial use except in conjunction with the
Commercial Use Supplement ("CUSupp"), effectively a second license appended to the SCSL:


The CUSupp elaborates on the definition of "Commercial Use":

"Commercial Use" means uses and distributions of Covered Code for any direct or indirect commercial
or strategic gain or advantage.

An explicit agreement with the Original Contributor (Sun, now Oracle) is required for the
CUSupp to take force:

This Commercial Use Supplement General Terms ("CUSupp") is required for Commercial Use of
Covered Code and shall be made effective as to any Technology specified in a Technology Specific
Attachment once such Technology Specific Attachment is signed by You and Original Contributor.

My analysis is that the SCSL belongs in Category X, under the subcategory "Non-commercial

I suggest that Hive research whether the jar file in question is available under another license.

> Is SCSL 3.0 license acceptable?
> -------------------------------
>                 Key: LEGAL-298
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-298
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Alan Gates
> Apache Hive includes a jar in its binary distribution that is licensed under SCSL 3.0
(http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/SCSL3.0.rtf).  As this license is not listed on
the "resolved" page we are not sure if this is an acceptable license or not.  

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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

View raw message