Alexander Terekhov wrote: [...] > > > I've addressed Windows already. As for Java... > > > > > > http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=34835 > > > > http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35691 > > (Sun releases Java under GPL licence ... A kick in the teeth > > It's not GPL-pure but rather "GNU Classpath::License" (GPL with > "linking exception"). > > http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t84256.html > > And according to > > http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t84244.html > > RMS will appear on a live web cast with Sun CEO Johnathan Schwartz > and software chief Rich Green. (Will teach them not to use "open > source" and always add Guh-NÜ-slash or Guh-NÜ-plus before Linux.) > > Can't wait.
What are disappointment. RMS and Eben renegaded to promo video clips. Ah well. Now, http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=839 ------ Sun was more afraid that rivals like IBM would mix Java with their own proprietary products than that businesses would shy away from Java because of the GPL's viral nature. That makes the announcement a key turning point. Sun, a big company dedicated to increasing its revenue and profits, chose the GPL for a key asset, citing its business advantages. This is something that advocates have been pointing out for some time, the idea that the viral nature of the GPL is a protection for intellectual property, because it places licensees under an obligation to release their enhancements. Now Sun has bought the concept. So, is the argument over? ------ And two nice comments from groklaw's visitors ------ [Disclaimer; I do a lot of Apache work in my free time, but on Ant, not Harmony] 1. Harmony can do things the GPL wont let, like be embedded without being open source. There is still value for some parties. 2. Intel are one of the big backers of Harmony. Because they want a high performance JVM out of Sun's control. 3. A lot of Sun's JVM source is legacy nightmare. The build process is, bits of the windowing system come from the Unix common desktop environment, the test framework needs to be worked by hand. Its not designed for open source use. Remember Ant came when Sun were open sourcing Tomcat; what they had before was all makefiles and a mess on windows. 4. Sun's JVM already has Apache code in. Xerces and Xalan are the XML engine in particular. Harmony shares the same code. 5. Both systems have to run against the java test kit, the TCK. This defines 'javaness', and has to be passed to get access to Sun's JVM patents. Harmony will probably be an OSS distro that passes these tests before J2SE is OSS. This doesnt mean that Sun's move isn't wonderful, its just its probably as much of a low ------ ------ What may have been missed in the noise of the Java-GPL celebration is the fact that Sun made its own sellout pact with Microsoft only a couple of years ago. Part of that pact was a "patent covenant not-a-licence" agreement appearing very similar to Novell-Microsoft (with the exception that it is not stated to cover the parties' customers - although it may in fact do so). To quote the sun press at the time: Patents and Intellectual Property: The parties have agreed to a broad covenant not to sue with respect to all past patent infringement claims they may have against each other. The agreement also provides for potential future extensions of this type of covenant. The two companies have also agreed to embark on negotiations for a patent cross-license agreement between them. In common with the Novell case, we have no public information on exactly which patents and products are at issue and there is no published provision for passing the covenant on to downstream recipients (as many are currently arguing is required under the GPL). There is no information (that I can find to date) on this covenant in the information on GPL Java The GPL issues regarding patent covenants-not-to-sue would not have been raised at the time of the Sun deal because there was no GPL software at issue - but now there is: Java. I have no doubt that Sun's motives are entirely honest in GPLing Java, however that does not mean that Microsoft may not be left holding the same patent trap as they claim to hold from the Novell agreement - as a result of the earlier Sun covenant. For some time now, various free-Java-replacement projects have attempted to provide an alternative for those free-software developers who could not accept Sun's previous licence. It is now likely that these projects will wither and die and become increasingly further behind Java itself. It is also likely that free software projects will become increasingly dependent on a full Java implementation - now that there is a free one available. This means that should MS wait a while before springing the patent trap, the alternative Java projects will be dead or no longer relevant/capable. The free software backup plan will be gone. For these reasons I believe it is important (whilst not wishing to detract from celebrations of Suns decision) that the Sun-MS patent covenant is subject to the same examination (reported to be in progress) as the Novell-MS covenant to determine the full nature of the patent threat and any GPL-compatibility problems in both cases. ------ He he. regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
