You can't stop someone from forking GPL/LGPL source, as long as you use the same _license_. What Fleury is talking about is that the LGPL (which JBoss is licensed under) gives Fleury the right to deny licensing of JBoss source under other licenses, specifically the Apache Software License (http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt). Infantile, but he'll do it anyway.
Now, what the Geronimo Project (Apache J2EE) should do is fork the code under the LGPL license. I think this may be a big change for the ASF as most (all?) of its projects are ASL, but it would be legal. Is this enough acronyms for you? ;) John Hebert -----Original Message----- From: Dustin Puryear To: [email protected] Sent: 8/6/03 11:27 AM Subject: Re: [brlug-general] for J2EE geeks: tempest in a teapot in the making was FW: [jboss- news] July 2003 news Perhaps my knowledge of open source is dated, but how can an open source project stop someone from forking off of their code? At 10:49 AM 8/6/2003 -0500, you wrote: >I look at the threat of lawsuits defending open source IP as more evidence >that open source is becoming a viable business model. It means there is >money on the table that somebody wants. ;) > >The summary is that the JBoss project (http://www.jboss.org) was snubbed a >long time ago by the Apache Software Foundation to provide a base for an >Apache J2EE project. Yesterday, the ASF has announced a J2EE effort >(http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10872) and stated that JBoss developers >are part of the effort. I'll bet its actually former JBoss developers who >previously walked out of the project. The guy heading up the JBoss project >(Marc Fleury) has his panties in a wad and will not allow the JBoss source >to be licensed under the Apache Software License. > >More soap opera below. > >John Hebert > >-----Original Message----- >From: marc fleury >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 8/5/03 11:33 PM >Subject: [jboss-news] July 2003 news > >... > >NEWS >Xxxx > >JBoss J2EE certification effort. >JBoss is increasingly used in production and as you all move to >production we realize that certification brand becomes an important >check mark. We have the financials to take it on, so we are. So many >people have asked us where that was at and the press is having a field >day with the story. It seems everyone likes drama. So there is no >drama at least not anymore on our side. For all intents and purposes, >JBoss has agreed to ALL the conditions imposed by SUN. It includes what >for us is a hefty sum of money. They didn't give us a break, they >didn't give us any break, which is kind of normal if you think about it >as there are many parties involved and SUN must treat all licensees the >same. In short the ball is in SUN's court and we are looking forward >to inking the contract. > >Apache J2EE effort. >First a bit of history. I offered EJBoss when it was 4 month old to >Apache. The guys at Jakarta vote OK unanimously and their vote was >overridden by Brian Behlendorf. The reason from behlendorf was that they >'were not the dust bin of open source projects'. I heard the Apache >crowd got offended for me calling them "a bunch of fat ladies drinking >tea" at a later date when they were running around telling us how to run >our project. We had reports that this was the non-official reason for >this "challenge". Challenge accepted. More seriously as we overtake >them in corporate penetration and business model, I guess they are >finally looking beyond the HTTPD C codebase and imitation is the >sincerest form of flattery. > >We are the real thing, all we have so far is talk and announcement, >announcements are a dime a dozen. Apache code on this project has yet >to be released and then production reached and then maturity bla bla >bla. I have little comment on the project except to say that JBOSS IS >NOT A PART OF IT. In a misleading announcement Apache chairman's Greg >Stein implied JBoss was participating and that JBOSS CODE WAS PART OF >THE PROJECT. No current JBoss developers are participating in the >Apache J2EE project and since JBoss is LGPL only full copyright holders >can offer JBoss code under other licenses. Bottom line? JBoss can't be >forked by apache. As our customers know, we are a business, a serious >one and we seriously believe in and defend "professional open source". >That includes legal protection of IP. Make no mistakes, JBoss will >AGGRESIVELY defend its copyright and LGPL license. > >... > >xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Marc Fleury, Ph.D >Founder >JBoss Group, LLC >xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >_______________________________________________ >jboss-news mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://mail.jboss.org:8080/mailman/listinfo/jboss-news > >_______________________________________________ >General mailing list >[email protected] >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net --- Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Puryear Information Technology, LLC <http://www.puryear-it.com> Providing expertise in the management, integration, and security of Windows and UNIX systems, networks, and applications. _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
