Quoting John Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > The most that Sun ought to reasonably require is that its trademarks > and certification marks not be applied to derivative works without a > separate license from Sun. This is very different from the case > of being allowed to reuse Sun's own code, where they may put in place > any restrictions they please.
Well said. Brian, I'd suggest that ASF's response might be something like this: ASF recognise Sun's right and duty to protect their proprietary interest in its trademarks and certification process. However, it would not be equitable to require that all derivatives -- including those not participating in the Java Community Process and neither using Sun trademarks nor claiming certification -- nonetheless meet the Process's branding and compatibility requirements. In as much as the Apache J2EE licence's term in question constitutes, in effect, an additional copyright restriction, it would also not be compatible with open source, and thus contradicts Sun's Letter of Intent dated March 26, 2002. (That's off the top of my head: I hope it's useful to you.) -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
