www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Derby and the JCP
Date Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:07:01 GMT
A new version of the JDBC4 license has been published. To view it, 
please go to 
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pfd/jsr221/index.html, click 
on "Download", then click on "Review License Agreement". This new 
version of the license removes item (3) from the previous version. That 
is the item which burdened Derby with the "for testing and evaluation 
purposes only" clause. I believe the following:

A) Derby may now distribute a GA release including JDBC4 drivers. There 
is no conflict with Apache's "AS IS" clause.

B) Derby's released zips and website do not need to include any 
JDBC4-related warnings or restrictions.

Does this sound correct?


Rick Hillegas wrote:

> In the next month, Derby plans to generate a new feature release 
> called 10.2. The Derby community is confused about a possible conflict 
> between the Apache 2.0 license and the JCP.
> When run on J2SE 1,3, 1.4, or 1.5 there is no problem.
> However, when run on Java SE 6, Derby 10.2 will expose JDBC drivers 
> which implement an early-draft of the JDBC4 spec, governed by JSR 221: 
> http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=221. The proposed final draft of 
> that spec may be found at 
> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pfd/jsr221/index.html. Item 
> (3) in the NOTICE section of that draft requires that Derby ship with 
> the following notice. It is this notice which may conflict with the 
> Apache 2.0 license:
> "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?
> Thanks,
> -Rick Hillegas

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