Edward,
I think you are looking at the evaluation clause. This clause only covers
evaluation. It is immediately followed by “License for the Distribution of
Compliant Implementations” which covers Apache Ignite with the following
text:
————-
2. License for the Distribution of Compliant Implementations. Specification
Leads also grant you a perpetual, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, limited license (without the right
to sublicense) under any applicable copyrights or, subject to the
provisions of subsection 4 below, patent rights it may have covering the
Specification to create and/or distribute an Independent Implementation of
the Specification that: (a) fully implements the Specification including
all its required interfaces and functionality; (b) does not modify, subset,
superset or otherwise extend the Licensor Name Space, or include any public
or protected packages, classes, Java interfaces, fields or methods within
the Licensor Name Space other than those required/authorized by the
Specification or Specifications being implemented; and (c) passes the
Technology Compatibility Kit (including satisfying the requirements of the
applicable TCK Users Guide) for such Specification ("Compliant
Implementation"). In addition, the foregoing license is expressly
conditioned on your not acting outside its scope. No license is granted
hereunder for any other purpose (including, for example, modifying the
Specification, other than to the extent of your fair use rights, or
distributing the Specification to third parties). Also, no right, title, or
interest in or to any trademarks, service marks, or trade names of
Specification Leads or Specification Leads' licensors is granted hereunder.
Java, and Java-related logos, marks and names are trademarks or registered
trademarks of Oracle America, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries.
—————
Having said that, I will follow up with JCache group about re-licensing
under Apache 2.0 license, given that Geronimo project already did this. I
will post an update here in a few days.
D.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:53 AM, edwardkblk <[email protected]
> wrote:
> Can't say I'm a license expert but it was pointed out by my legal
> department.
> Here is my understanding of the issue: Anyone who would like to use
> apache-ignite is now forced to accept the license of cache-api-1.0.0.jar.
> That license pretty much does not permit the use of the cache-api beyond
> the
> evaluation or implementation purposes. Hence apache-ignite or any other
> implementations with the runtime dependency on cache-api-1.0.0.jar can not
> be used beyond the evaluation. Here is a link to more details from the
> issue raised in jsr107 space:
> https://github.com/jsr107/jsr107spec/issues/333 . Based on this
> discussion
> the options seems to be either to change cache-api-1.0.0.jar licensing to
> Apache 2.0 (hopefully this is possible) or change apache-ignite to use
> geronimo-jcache_1.0_spec which is apache JCache API.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ignite-cache-api-licensing-issue-tp3306p3344.html
> Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
