Upayavira wrote:
> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
>
>>Richard S. Hall wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It seems like we could just remove the offending code with the
>>>dependency until it is resolved if this were going to hold up graduation.
>>
>>What offending code though? Referencing the javax.microedition classes
>>seems fine from the licence terms of the JSR 139 specification? It includes:
>>
>> Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun") hereby grants you a
>> fully-paid, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
>> worldwide, limited license (without the right to
>> sublicense), under the Sun's applicable
>> intellectual property rights to view, download,
>> use and reproduce the Specification only for the
>> purpose of internal evaluation, which shall be
>> understood to include developing applications
>> intended to run on an implementation of the
>> Specification provided that such applications do
>> not themselves implement any portion(s) of the
>> Specification.
>>
>>JSR-000139 Connected Limited Device Configuration 1.1
>>(Final Release)
>>
>>http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr139/index.html
>> follow the links to download the spec and then review licence.
>
>
> "without the right to sublicense"
>
> Isn't that enough to scupper us?
Hmmm, ok, got me there. Doesn't that mean that writing any application
against J2ME CLDC is not allowed.
Dan.
