Re: LICENSE in .jar files

acoliver wrote: > I do. I was just curious. > Have you a licence for that? :-) It's a mad world. Conor -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: RE: LICENSE in .jar files

I do. I was just curious. >On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 08:26:50 -0500 "Berin Loritsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >> From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> >> BTW. Define: "release" ;-) > > >That sounds like former persident Bill Clinton with his >"define sexual relations". Such a que

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

> From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > BTW. Define: "release" ;-) That sounds like former persident Bill Clinton with his "define sexual relations". Such a question insinuates guilt, and that you are trying to find a letter of the law loop hole to be clever about. Lawers ar

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

I guess I'm wondering what the legal definition of "reverse-engineer" means. To me that means disassemble. If I just write something that happens to have the same interface, inputs and outputs, to me that doesn't qualify as "reverse-engineer" but maybe thats just me. When my 5 year old stepson

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Conor MacNeill wrote: > I don't know. IANAL. We really do need a lawyer. Anyway, in my view, you > would not be able to legally run such a reverse engineered clone on a Sun You have a lawyer - or rather - the PMC has access to those beast. This is being worked on (even toda

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

> -Original Message- > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, 21 March 2002 1:10 PM > To: Jakarta General List > Subject: RE: LICENSE in .jar files > > > BTW. Define: "release" ;-) > I guess it would be up to a court

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

> -Original Message- > From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, 21 March 2002 1:03 PM > To: Jakarta General List > Subject: RE: LICENSE in .jar files > > > So could a non-tainted person through black box testing produce their > own

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:03, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > So could a non-tainted person through black box testing produce their > own JAXP clone? I don't see how as they need access to Suns IP someway and there is no way to get a license to do that. Ie can't use spec without being "tainted" and can't

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

BTW. Define: "release" ;-) On Wed, 2002-03-20 at 19:55, Conor MacNeill wrote: > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > > > > I think what Peter said was that you can read the spec only if you > > agree with the licence, and that pr

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

So could a non-tainted person through black box testing produce their own JAXP clone? -Andy On Wed, 2002-03-20 at 19:55, Conor MacNeill wrote: > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > > > > I think what Peter said was that you can

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

Sorry for my tangent - it's clear that on legal matters, I should just get the heck outta Dodge and let someone with more patience work on it. 8-{ I've forwarded a link (with threading) to your (Conor's) message to the xml PMC so they should be aware of this licensing issue with JAXP and xml-com

RE: LICENSE in .jar files

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > I think what Peter said was that you can read the spec only if you > agree with the licence, and that prevents you from implementing it > unless you follow all the rules. > You can read the spec.

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 10:01, Shane Curcuru wrote: > > IANAL, and I have no idea how this corresponds to usage of the JAXP > > specification, but it seems pretty clear that this is an implementation > > of JAXP that's under the Apache license... > > And b

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 10:01, Shane Curcuru wrote: > IANAL, and I have no idea how this corresponds to usage of the JAXP > specification, but it seems pretty clear that this is an implementation > of JAXP that's under the Apache license... And blatently illegal to boot ;) -- Cheers, Pete --

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

> A complete readme, giving pointers to download your own lawful version > of jaxp.jar, would also include how to live without jaxp.jar, if this is > possible. Sorry if this is off on a tangent, but if you're just looking for an implementation of the javax.xml.parsers and javax.xml.transform pack

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

Well, This may work if: 1> the license applies to the redistributed version 2> or this license is provided only as a "proof of purchase" (that is a receipt that allows ASF to distribute this) but something more has to be indicated, that is, how to get it for yourself so as to be able to redis

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 22:16, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > On 3/14/02 9:17 PM, "Jon Scott Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > on 3/14/02 6:09 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Would it be a good protocol to put a LICENSE file in > >> .jar files under META-INF ? > > >

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

On 3/14/02 9:17 PM, "Jon Scott Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > on 3/14/02 6:09 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Would it be a good protocol to put a LICENSE file in >> .jar files under META-INF ? > > Sure. > > *poof* it is now done in all of the Jakarta projects. >

Re: LICENSE in .jar files

on 3/14/02 6:09 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would it be a good protocol to put a LICENSE file in > .jar files under META-INF ? Sure. *poof* it is now done in all of the Jakarta projects. Don't you like magic like that? -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: