Looks like there's some rumble of a joint counter attempt by Oracle & HP. The numbers don't look close to IBM's though:
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/03/26/oracle_hp_joint_sun_deal/ On Mar 27, 5:36 am, kirk <kirk.pepperd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Van Riper wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:18 PM, jharby <jha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> The agreement to join the JCP really > >> gives a good deal of power to Sun > >> -http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/JSPA2.pdf > > > I'm not disagreeing with assessment that Sun has more than its fair > > share of influence in the activities of the JCP. However, I don't see > > it being due to the structure of this legal agreement. I'm no lawyer, > > but, this agreement seems to me to be mainly about making clear that > > contributions to the JCP must be unencumbered IP. Not really seeing > > where this particular legal document gives Sun any particular power > > that IBM would inherit through acquisition. Please enlighten me. > > > Thanks, Van > > Sun does have veto power on just about everthing and try to get an > unbundled version of the JDK from Oracle, IBM and others. Point is, you > can't. This may not be in this particular document but this document > doesn't cover all the details. Right now one has to agree with Apache, > Sun isn't following their own rules. > > Kirk --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
