Dalibor Topic wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
I understand you are concerned about the SCO-like patent attacks of
somebody coming in and telling you that you can't run your own code
because they own the rights to the concept... but if that is the case
against the RI, we have a way bigger problem and that's nothing a
license can fix.
I think a good part of the nightmare scenarious surrouding licensees
going mad and trying to
fracture the platform for fun and profit could be fixed quite easily by
IBM and BEA dropping
their cards on the table, and going open source with their proprietary
implementations of
Java as well.
Maybe - or just declaring a patent peace or patent commons. I think
that there's nothing wrong with proprietary software, so if they want to
keep competing using it, great.
The platform will be much stronger against external attacks if the large
vendors are in the
same boat with Sun, rather than if strong stakeholders have an incentive
to innovate on
proprietary branches, and perpetuate the current lock-in-based licensing
schemes.
Well, I think there's a balance to be had... that you want people to
have an investment in the codebase held "in common", as well as the
ability to invest in innovation.
I don't think the market could sort a proprietary fork from IBM out
easily, for example.
I don't understand what that means.
And I don't think it should have to, given IBM's and BEA's open letter
campaign for open
source Java a little while ago.
It's time to put up, and invest into the future of the platform, rather
than future of lock-in.
One way would be for everyone to work on a common codebase for things
that are shared, in a symmetrical, equal fashion, with the ability to do
whatever proprietary work they want too...
geir
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
