Thanks a lot. I read all your replies to this thread and I even agree with 
some of your opinions on this group. If they didn't know they should have 
just let your thread die off and fade away. Now it's on the #1 page of 
Google for "linux commercial license to use java" and because you chose to 
withold the information on Oracle's policy, I just wasted 30 minutes 
reading your angry replies. What a complete shit-thread this turned out to 
be.

On Monday, July 16, 2012 7:58:58 PM UTC-5, Grant Robertson wrote:
>
> This is a generic answer to all those people who jump in on EVERY question 
> about open-source licensing and just say, "go see a lawyer":
>
> SERIOUSLY?  I'm just a guy who is thinking about writing some software in 
> a popular programming language. But before I get started I need to go find 
> a lawyer who specializes in open-source licensing and pay some serious 
> bucks just so they can give me what will essentially be a guess as to what 
> would happen if any of this went to court. SERIOUSLY?   REALLY? 
>
>
> There are a lot of people writing a lot of Java code. The people who 
> started this Google Group claim to actually know a lot about it.  Someone 
> HAS to actually know the answers to my questions. My questions are more 
> about policy than about law:
>
>    - Does Oracle require people to register as Licensees just to 
>    distribute their own Java Code? The statement on Oracle's web site is 
>    confusing because they appear to have used the word "compatible" when they 
>    meant to say "functionally identical"?
>
> Seriously, not a single soul in here knows the answer to that one? Or they 
> know, but I have to go have a lawyer tell me what Oracle's policy is? 
> Fortunately, other people elsewhere have given me a clean and unambiguous 
> answer. (Which I will NOT reveal here, because actual information is 
> apparently forbidden in this group.)
>
> My other question was about the accuracy of documentation:
>
>    - Now that Oracle has rolled (or is planning to roll) "commercial 
>    features" into non-commercial (supposedly free) distributions of Java, 
> will 
>    it be easy for me to spot those features so I can avoid using them?
>
> Again, not a single response that even addresses the actual question. Just 
> calls to "go all open source all the way" and "go see a lawyer." Do you 
> guys go see a lawyer before you go to the bathroom? Why do you even respond 
> at all? Do you sit down and think, "How can I obfuscate information and 
> frustrate people as much as possible today?"
>
> If someone had just said, "I'm sorry, I don't know." that would have been 
> better than all the time-wasting, rabbit-hole digging, obfuscation. 
>
> Needless to say, I will not be participating in this group again. 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java 
Posse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to