> > Sure - so (it seems to me) rather hard for anyone except Sun to > > prosecute an LGPL violation here - > > Indeed, they're the copyright holder of the entirety of the code.
> Redmond. In short, criticzing the JCA may be valid, but it's > particularly unappropriate - or perhaps just pathetic- coming > from you. Charles, That comment is way out of bounds. It is very appropriate for Michael to comment on this. Michael's point is this: under the JCA, Novell is the JOINT holder of copyright in all of their contributions to OpenOffice.org. Novell could INDEPENDENTLY assert a copyright violation claim against Butler Office Pro for violating Novell's copyright to Novell's contributions. The problem that Michael is pointing out is that under the JCA, Sun has the right to license Novell's contributions to anyone they want under any terms they want. This means that Sun could simply settle Novell's copyright violation claims against Butler Office behind Novell's back, without Novell's permission, by offering Butler Office a license to Novell's contributions. I think that is the point of Michael's post, and it is a very valid point. Even though Novell holds joint copyright to their contributions under the JCA, they have essentially surrendering their right to assert copyright violations. Allen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
