Michael Emmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think there are some serious licensing issues ????
As long as you aren't mixing Classpath source with Sun source -- that
is, you're only using certain Classpath classes to replace Sun
classes, you should be OK. However, I'm not a lawyer, nor am I
intimately familiar with all the various licenses that Sun has
released their libraries under.
> It seems Suns new license simply require that the JDK port pass the
> JCK. This seems to be the real difference between Classpath and
> Suns new license.
The SCSL is one of the most evil licenses that I have ever read. It's
a million miles away from being considered a free software license.
The JCK is one issue; royalties are another major issue. There are
many others.
> 1.) I think Sun could probably enforce compliance for commercial use of
> clean room implementations.
> At the very least they can litigate.
> Thus classpath will probably have to pass the JCK.
They cannot force us to pass the JCK -- there is no legal basis,
whatsoever, for them doing so. One of the reasons the FSF retains the
copyright on Classpath is for the specific purpose that if there is
any legal action taken against us, there would be only one entity
(FSF) needed to fully represent all the Classpath developers and their
source.
> 2.) Even if they cannot I think that classpath will eventually want
> to pass the JCK.
If we ever pass the JCK, we will pass it because we want to, not
because Sun is forcing us. Given that the JCK is only given out to
Java licensees, and Sun has decided not to submit any Java
specifications to ISO or ECMA, it's doubtful that we'll even have the
option to pass any type of standard/or quasi-standard tests anytime in
the near future.
