Justin Chapweske wrote:
> > It was my understanding that this is not the case :
> >
> > <P>Internal Deployment of Compliant Covered Code is considered a
> > Commercial Use and is subject to payment of "per unit" royalties to Sun
> > based on the
> > intended Field of Use, in the same manner as Commercial Use.
> > Implementations
> > of the Java<SUP>tm</SUP> 2 SDK must include Added Value.
> >
> > That not even the same as freely distributed.
> >
> > Mike
> >
>
> This doesn't apply to research/non-profit use. This is for companies like IBM
> who'll make some changes to the JVM to help support their products
> internally...I'm not defending it, just trying to shed some light.
>
But I can't just take the JDK1.2 source say it's for research and publish it on
my web site. I do stand behind the "Idea" of a standard java esp for application
development.
I can't distribute in source code from according to there license. IMHO.
The concept of reasearch binary distribution makes sense only to Sun an IBM Alpha
Works.
I'd like to distribute at least in pathc format but for example my code is not
based off of Suns
so a Patch release makes no sense. I hesistate to even begin to work with there
code.
I do use the Swing src but my top level stuff is tied to the Swing.
I guess some guy just needs to get sued by Sun to clear this up. I doub't they
care to clear up
issues for us little fish.
Who's first ??
Mike
