Perhaps it would be interesting to you to know about this voting:
http://www.java.net/pub/pq/116 Thanks, Vladimir. On 8/24/06, Chris Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 13:22, Leo Simons wrote: > Licensing > --------- > On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 07:38:36PM -0700, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > [what license should Sun use to open source java] > > > I'll bite: the MIT license. > > +1, for all the reasons Stefano described. Along with the neccessary, > explicit, relevant patent grants, preferably with GPL-compatible terms > (eg non-reciprocical; would probably automatically meet requirements > off standards bodies and open source orgs worldwide). Typically standards orgs have a patent policy already in place, see e.g. [1], [2]. These are probably the result of quite a lot of thought and discussion, so they should be read not just as something with which a proposed patent grant needs to be compatible but also as prior art in this field. [1] <http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/codeofconduct.htm> [2] <http://www.niso.org/committees/OpenURL/PATPOL.pdf> -- Chris Gray /k/ Embedded Java Solutions BE0503765045 Embedded & Mobile Java, OSGi http://www.k-embedded-java.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +32 3 216 0369 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
