Over in geronimo we noticed this text and have responded by:
1. for the schemas that we generate code from (using xmlbeans or
jaxb) we checked the schemas into a non-publically-accessible
repository (with our tck stuff) and generate the code there, and
publish source and binary jars, both without the schemas themselves.
2. We also have an ongoing effort to produce unencumbered schemas.
Apparently (IANAL) the actual schema/dtd is not copyrightable as it
is an interface specification, the part that is copyrightable is the
comments, annotations, etc. So, we have been typing up the schemas
ourselves without any of the descriptive material.
I don't remember the exact history but I think that Sun declined to
change or clarify the licensing terms so we could redistribute the
sun schemas themselves. It's also possible that we just couldn't get
an answer.
My understanding is that tomcat svn includes quite a number of
schemas/dtds with these license conditions, and that this is ok
because they were checked into svn (or more likely cvs) by sun
employees who presumably had the proper authorization to do so.
How something that is freely available on the web without going
through even a clickthrough license can be maintained to be
confidential is a question I can only assume lawyers would love to
answer.
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 2, 2007, at 8:23 AM, Lance Bader wrote:
I am disturbed by the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd and web-
facesconfig_1_1.dtd files included in myfaces-impl-1.2.0-
SNAPSHOT.jar. The prolog in both files says
<!--
Copyright 2004 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL. Use is subject to license terms.
-->
I'm willing to believe that a Sun developer forgot to clean up the
prologs when these DTD files were released, but I don't want to
lose my job because I have distributed restricted SUN property.
I have done some homework. The subject files are available from
the Sun Developers Site at http://java.sun.com/dtd/ where Sun
declares that "Unless otherwise licensed, code in all technical
manuals herein (including articles, FAQs, samples) is provided
under this License." and "this License" links to the same Sun
License included in myfaces-impl-1.2.0-SNAPSHOT.jar. The problem
is that this blanket statement does not apply to something declared
proprietary/confidential; something declared proprietary/
confidential is "otherwise licensed" and cannot be distributed.
Can someone show me evidence that Sun permits these files to be
distributed? Maybe there is a special agreement with the Apache
Software Foundation that can be referenced.
Are these files just included as a convenience? What would break
if I just removed them from the JAR?
It's not a perfect world,
Lance
