www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Will Glass-Husain" <wgl...@forio.com>
Subject Re: Derby and the JCP
Date Sat, 05 Aug 2006 00:06:37 GMT

Not sure if this is a legal problem for Apache, but wow - that seems
like a significant branding issue.  As a potential developer, when I
download and embed an Apache product, I assume that I can use it with
almost no restrictions.  (outside of certain license-related
notifications).  If the fact that I use Derby means that my User
Application has restrictions on use - I'm very concerned.  It's a
significant change to Apache philosophy.

Incidentally, if I'm misunderstanding and this is a consequence of a
license the user accepted with a pre-release version of Java SE 6,
that's very different.


On 8/4/06, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
> IANAL, but I don't think there is a problem. Derby is not an application.
> The only way you can run Derby that exposes JDBC4 functionality is by
> running a User Application with Java SE 6. If a User Application runs in
> this environment, is is subject to the testing and evaluation terms of the
> license.
> So there is no need to encumber Derby NOTICEs with this disclaimer.
> Craig
> Geir Magnusson, Jr wrote:
> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> > Rick Hillegas wrote:
> >
> >> "This is an application written to interoperate
> >> with an early-draft specification developed under the
> >> Java Community Process (JCP) and is made available for
> >> testing and evaluation purposes only. The code is not
> >> compatible with any specification of the JCP."
> >>
> >> We need your guidance:
> >>
> >> 1) Does this notice conflict with the Apache 2.0 license?
> >>
> >> 2) In particular, does this notice conflict with the AS IS clause of the
> >> Apache 2.0 license?
> >
> > 3) Is the restriction "made available for testing and evaluation
> > purposes only" acceptable for an ASF project?
> > (assuming that it means the restriction is on the application, not the
> > spec).
> Before we wander down into the rathole the question implies - namely :
> 1) who from the project was able to accept the license of the spec in a
> way that binds the ASF?
> 2)the code existed in the ASF repo before the spec was publicly
> available, so it's even arguable that we didn't use the spec to create
> the code.
> - lets see if we can get Sun to simply fix it by removing use
> restrictions in the spec license.
> (I do like #2 - that we had the code before the spec was released :)
> geir
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
> http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Forio Business Simulations

Will Glass-Husain

DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message