On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 01:25:31PM +0200, Fabrizio Giustina wrote: > Some more thoughts... > > The same problem with Sun licenses was recently addressed also by > Eclipse. They implemented a click-through mechanism where the user > must accept the sun license everytime a file is requested from a sun > server (an eclipse window containing a page from the sun website and > an eccept button is displayed). The same could be done for maven.
No, please. Don't. That would screw up automated builds. For such a scheme gone bad, see NetBeans 3 build system, where you have to click through many licenses to get the IDE built. There was a super secret Sun internal way of working around that to make automated builds work, judging by the build scripts. Ugh. > You will not believe it, but this is also required for standard dtds > and xsds (like the web.xml schema)... according to Sun any xml editor > which reads the xsd declaration in an xml file and tries to download > it for validation without prompting for the license could be > considered illegal?!? That's a new one. Got an URL ? > Maybe somebody would came up with an unofficial repository outside > apache containing the sun jars and the above notice, of course > explaining he will immediately remove them if Sun will complain about > such use not contemplated in their not-so-clear license (emh, not a > suggestion, but maybe...) Well, two problems: redistribution without license is copyright violation, and that, if done for commercial purposes, can carry a few years of jail time and a hefty monetary penalty per violation in the USA. Not much fun, really, if you have a family to feed, or just care about your own future. If you don't care about your future, then chances are there a more interesting ways to destroy your life, than by violating other people's copyrights and paying up for it for the rest of your life. ;) Such lawsuits are standard procedure in the p2p field. Usually the $BIGCORPS win, and the people who lose don't like the results they end up with very much. The other problem is that if you don't have a license to redistribute the jars, people getting those jars from you don't have a license to use them, just like buying a Windows XP Pro CD for 3 USD on a flea market in Russia does not actually mean you actually have a license from Microsoft to use that copy of Windows XP Pro. ;) That can matter if say, a company C downloading the jars from you gets into a lawsuit with the $BIGCORP that owns the proprietary jars, and during the discovery process, it turns out that C is using $BIGCORPS's proprietary technology without license. Such a thing never looks good in court. cheers, dalibor topic --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
