On 9/20/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The licence is on page 2 of the JMS specification pdf.
Remember that the specification != javadoc that is available.
The issue of re-implementing the APIs is a completely separate topic,
related (I believe) to permitted uses described in the licence you agreed
to when you downloaded the JDK.
I think that the Geronimo JMS API that was developed at Apache we as
done just using the javadoc as the reference. And the ActiveMQ
implementation was built to implement that Geronimo JMS api. And the
c++ and .net APIs were built out from the concepts of the existing
java clients for ActiveMQ. So I think it would be VERY hard for sun
to argue that a C++ api for ActiveMQ in in violation of any copyrights
or licenses. The only licences attached to ActiveMQ and Geronimo is
the ASL2 AFAIK.
So at the very least it would be easy to argue that developing a C++
based API based on Apache licenced java code and javadocs should not
impose a problem.
RG
|---------+---------------------------->
| | "Hiram Chirino" |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | no.com> |
| | Sent by: |
| | [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | |
| | |
| | 19/09/2006 23:42 |
| | Please respond to|
| | qpid-dev |
|---------+---------------------------->
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: [email protected]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: Fw: JMS like API for C++
|
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I'm not a lawyer either.. but I don't see any licenses that I agreed
to when I looked at:
http://java.sun.com/j2ee/1.4/docs/api/javax/jms/package-summary.html
or even on a more contentious note, the Apache implementation of the
API interfaces here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-jms_1.1_spec/src/main/java/javax/jms/
On 9/19/06, Robert Greig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, a JMS like API needs to be developed from scratch obviously! We
> > can't copy it since it would be a copyright violation. Unless Sun
> > holds a patent on JMS, I don't think that they can protect the ideas
> > behind the JMS api.
>
> I am not a lawyer, and what I am saying is certainly not my opinion,
> but the opinion of our legal counsel.
>
> I believe that this bit of the licence is relevant:
>
> "Any use of the Specification and the information described therein
> will be governed by the terms and conditions of this license and the
> Export Control
> Guidelines as set forth in the Terms of Use on Sun's website. By
> viewing, downloading or otherwise copying the Specification, you agree
> that you have read, understood, and will comply with all of the terms
> and conditions set forth herein.
> Subject to the terms and conditions of this license, Sun hereby grants
> you a fully-paid, non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide, limited
> license (without the right to sublicense) under Sun's intellectual
> property rights to review the Specification internally solely for the
> purpose
> of designing and developing your Java applets and applications
> intended to run on the Java platform."
>
> Given that you would probably find it difficult to argue that you have
> not downloaded or read the specification, you have agreed to abide by
> the terms of the licence.
>
> > Besides, C++ is a totally different beast from Java. I think we HAVE
> > to be different. We just want an API that is similar in concepts.
>
> Yes, I don't actually think it is terribly difficult to be different.
>
> > > Did you get any agreement from Sun to create a JMS-like API for C++?
> > >
> > Don't see why we need to. It's just a Messaging API that bears
> > resemblance to JMS. It does not have any reference to the term 'jms'
> > in it so it's not a trademark violation.
>
> I suppose it depends whether someone could argue that you used the
> specification to develop your API, which you did describe as "JMS
> like".
>
> > So I fail to see why we need
> > permission. Did linux need permission to implement posix like APIs?
>
> I have no idea what the posix licence agreement looks like.
>
> RG
>
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
This communication is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as an
offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument or as an
official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data and other
information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and are subject to
change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein do not necessarily
reflect those of JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates.
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, legally
privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance
thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and any attachments are
believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer
system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the
recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by
JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for any
loss or damage arising in any way from its use. If you received this transmission
in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its
entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you.
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
