The licence is on page 2 of the JMS specification pdf.

The issue of re-implementing the APIs is a completely separate topic,
related (I believe) to permitted uses described in the licence you agreed
to when you downloaded the JDK.

RG


|---------+---------------------------->
|         |           "Hiram Chirino"  |
|         |           <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
|         |           no.com>          |
|         |           Sent by:         |
|         |           [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
|         |                            |
|         |                            |
|         |           19/09/2006 23:42 |
|         |           Please respond to|
|         |           qpid-dev         |
|---------+---------------------------->
  
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                             
                                                 |
  |       To:       [email protected]                               
                                                 |
  |       cc:                                                                   
                                                 |
  |       Subject:  Re: Fw: JMS like API for C++                                
                                                 |
  
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|




I'm not a lawyer either.. but I don't see any licenses that I agreed
to when I looked at:
http://java.sun.com/j2ee/1.4/docs/api/javax/jms/package-summary.html

or even on a more contentious note, the Apache implementation of the
API interfaces here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-jms_1.1_spec/src/main/java/javax/jms/



On 9/19/06, Robert Greig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, a JMS like API needs to be developed from scratch obviously!  We
> > can't copy it since it would be a copyright violation.  Unless Sun
> > holds a patent on JMS, I don't think that they can protect the ideas
> > behind the JMS api.
>
> I am not a lawyer, and what I am saying is certainly not my opinion,
> but the opinion of our legal counsel.
>
> I believe that this bit of the licence is relevant:
>
> "Any use of the Specification and the information described therein
> will be governed by the terms and conditions of this license and the
> Export Control
> Guidelines as set forth in the Terms of Use on Sun's website. By
> viewing, downloading or otherwise copying the Specification, you agree
> that you have read, understood, and will comply with all of the terms
> and conditions set forth herein.
> Subject to the terms and conditions of this license, Sun hereby grants
> you a fully-paid, non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide, limited
> license (without the right to sublicense) under Sun's intellectual
> property rights to review the Specification internally solely for the
> purpose
> of designing and developing your Java applets and applications
> intended to run on the Java platform."
>
> Given that you would probably find it difficult to argue that you have
> not downloaded or read the specification, you have agreed to abide by
> the terms of the licence.
>
> > Besides, C++ is a totally different beast from Java.  I think we HAVE
> > to be different.  We just want an API that is similar in concepts.
>
> Yes, I don't actually think it is terribly difficult to be different.
>
> > > Did you get any agreement from Sun to create a JMS-like API for C++?
> > >
> > Don't see why we need to.  It's just a Messaging API that bears
> > resemblance to JMS.  It does not have any reference to the term 'jms'
> > in it so it's not a trademark violation.
>
> I suppose it depends whether someone could argue that you used the
> specification to develop your API, which you did describe as "JMS
> like".
>
> > So I fail to see why we need
> > permission.  Did linux need permission to implement posix like APIs?
>
> I have no idea what the posix licence agreement looks like.
>
> RG
>


--
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com




This communication is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as an 
offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument or 
as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data and 
other information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and are 
subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein do not 
necessarily reflect those of JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and 
affiliates.

This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, 
legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you 
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including 
any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and 
any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might 
affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the 
responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no 
responsibility is accepted by JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, as applicable, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its 
use. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the 
sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard 
copy format. Thank you.
 

Reply via email to