You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jcp-open@apache.org by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> on 2007/05/13 05:00:21 UTC
[OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Folks,
The Open JDK FAQ has a section on Code and Encumbrances. I wonder why
it does not list all the software under Apache License both 1.X and
2.0? For example, Sun has versions of various Apache projects like
BCEL, RegExp, Xalan/XPath, Xerces and XML-Security under its own
package name com.sun.org.apache [2]. Looks like the Sun Lawyers did
not read "GPL-Incompatible Free Software Licenses" and
"GPL-compatibility". As we all know as per FSF, code under Apache
License is not kosher with GPLv2. Looks like the Classpath community
needs to rescue Sun/OpenJDK from the clutches of Evil Apache just like
they freed Java :)
Thanks,
dims
[1] http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/faq.jsp#h
[2] https://openjdk.dev.java.net/source/browse/openjdk/jdk/trunk/j2se/src/share/classes/com/sun/org/apache/
--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On May 29, 2007, at 1:40 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>> On May 25, 2007, at 3:41 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I wish them the best of luck with that one. Worked for MySQL
>>>> though, so
>>>> who knows.
>>>
>>> Uhm - read the MySQL **exception** clauses.
>>
>> I did. And I don't understand them.
>
> The exception clause say it can be combined with *any* oss approved
> license. The tricky bit is that it injects a copyleft requirement to
> otherwise non-copyleft license terms ;-)
>
>> The incompatibility between the AL and GPL isn't one of taste or
>> preference by a copyright owner using the GPL. For example, the
>> virality of the GPL - which is a loss of freedom placed on
>> recipients by
>> the copyright holder for those that choose to accept the license
>> - can
>> be voluntarily suspended by a licensor. The GNU Classpath project
>> does
>> this, as does the OpenJDK project.
>
> By the LGPL which is non-viral. I would not trust a GPL license
> with the
> copyleft terms removed, it's no longer GPL and it's questionable if
> that
> is in fact a legitimate modification of the GPL. Only the author
> [s] could
> choose to offer such terms. By the time you finish reworking a
> license
> to do what it wasn't ment to do, you are better off dual-licensing
> the code
> rather than create a meaningless/contradictory license.
>
Both MySQL and OpenJDK are GPL based, not LGPL based, right?
>> But the problem between the AL and GPL is supposedly something
>> completely different, so it's not clear to me how that problem can go
>> away just because MySQL wants to use APR. In the same way, just
>> because
>> Sun ran the boat into the rocks because they chose the GPL in
>> order to
>> keep their commercial license stream doesn't mean that they can
>> wish the
>> problems away.
>
> MySQL takes the AL + GPL + even weirder terms, so it's a really bad
> example
> to look at (see my first comment above.)
>
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> On May 25, 2007, at 3:41 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>> I wish them the best of luck with that one. Worked for MySQL though, so
>>> who knows.
>>
>> Uhm - read the MySQL **exception** clauses.
>
> I did. And I don't understand them.
The exception clause say it can be combined with *any* oss approved
license. The tricky bit is that it injects a copyleft requirement to
otherwise non-copyleft license terms ;-)
> The incompatibility between the AL and GPL isn't one of taste or
> preference by a copyright owner using the GPL. For example, the
> virality of the GPL - which is a loss of freedom placed on recipients by
> the copyright holder for those that choose to accept the license - can
> be voluntarily suspended by a licensor. The GNU Classpath project does
> this, as does the OpenJDK project.
By the LGPL which is non-viral. I would not trust a GPL license with the
copyleft terms removed, it's no longer GPL and it's questionable if that
is in fact a legitimate modification of the GPL. Only the author[s] could
choose to offer such terms. By the time you finish reworking a license
to do what it wasn't ment to do, you are better off dual-licensing the code
rather than create a meaningless/contradictory license.
> But the problem between the AL and GPL is supposedly something
> completely different, so it's not clear to me how that problem can go
> away just because MySQL wants to use APR. In the same way, just because
> Sun ran the boat into the rocks because they chose the GPL in order to
> keep their commercial license stream doesn't mean that they can wish the
> problems away.
MySQL takes the AL + GPL + even weirder terms, so it's a really bad example
to look at (see my first comment above.)
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On May 25, 2007, at 3:41 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>> I wish them the best of luck with that one. Worked for MySQL
>> though, so
>> who knows.
>
> Uhm - read the MySQL **exception** clauses.
I did. And I don't understand them.
The incompatibility between the AL and GPL isn't one of taste or
preference by a copyright owner using the GPL. For example, the
virality of the GPL - which is a loss of freedom placed on recipients
by the copyright holder for those that choose to accept the license
- can be voluntarily suspended by a licensor. The GNU Classpath
project does this, as does the OpenJDK project.
But the problem between the AL and GPL is supposedly something
completely different, so it's not clear to me how that problem can go
away just because MySQL wants to use APR. In the same way, just
because Sun ran the boat into the rocks because they chose the GPL in
order to keep their commercial license stream doesn't mean that they
can wish the problems away.
Happy to learn how this is possible...
geir
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> I wish them the best of luck with that one. Worked for MySQL though, so
> who knows.
Uhm - read the MySQL **exception** clauses.
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On May 25, 2007, at 12:28 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On 5/13/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Yep. They need to figure that one out. I heard secondhand that I
>> believe Mark Reinhold said that they would fix this. I'm not sure
>> how. Should be interesting.
>
> eh, easy; Sun has not done any Copyright assigns to FSF, so the legal
> department at Sun will issue their own interpretation of whether AL is
> kosher or not, just like JBoss has (albeit for the less encumbered
> LGPL)... Expect to see a Sun statement; "We don't see AL being
> incompatible with GPL." sooner or later.
I wish them the best of luck with that one. Worked for MySQL though,
so who knows.
If they do decide to go that route, $10 gets you $20 that you'll see
a lot of previously held strong views on the subject change in a way
that would make Trotsky proud, in the same way that those who
strenuously objected to contributing anything under the Apache
License because it aided "software hoarding" and "strip mining"
forgot they felt that way once offered the chance to contribute joint
copyright to Sun for OpenJDK (who intends to sell the code to
"software hoarders" and "strip miners" under freer licenses than the
GPL). Ah, the politics of dancing.
geir
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Work is in progress - expect an official answer shortly on the final
word on AL - GPL (3) compatibility.
Bill
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On 5/13/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Yep. They need to figure that one out. I heard secondhand that I
>> believe Mark Reinhold said that they would fix this. I'm not sure
>> how. Should be interesting.
>
> eh, easy; Sun has not done any Copyright assigns to FSF, so the legal
> department at Sun will issue their own interpretation of whether AL is
> kosher or not, just like JBoss has (albeit for the less encumbered
> LGPL)... Expect to see a Sun statement; "We don't see AL being
> incompatible with GPL." sooner or later.
>
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>
>
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On 5/13/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Yep. They need to figure that one out. I heard secondhand that I
> believe Mark Reinhold said that they would fix this. I'm not sure
> how. Should be interesting.
eh, easy; Sun has not done any Copyright assigns to FSF, so the legal
department at Sun will issue their own interpretation of whether AL is
kosher or not, just like JBoss has (albeit for the less encumbered
LGPL)... Expect to see a Sun statement; "We don't see AL being
incompatible with GPL." sooner or later.
Cheers
Niclas
Re: [OT(?)] Encumbered code in openjdk - code under Apache License?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@pobox.com>.
On May 12, 2007, at 11:00 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Folks,
>
> The Open JDK FAQ has a section on Code and Encumbrances. I wonder why
> it does not list all the software under Apache License both 1.X and
> 2.0? For example, Sun has versions of various Apache projects like
> BCEL, RegExp, Xalan/XPath, Xerces and XML-Security under its own
> package name com.sun.org.apache [2]. Looks like the Sun Lawyers did
> not read "GPL-Incompatible Free Software Licenses" and
> "GPL-compatibility". As we all know as per FSF, code under Apache
> License is not kosher with GPLv2. Looks like the Classpath community
> needs to rescue Sun/OpenJDK from the clutches of Evil Apache just like
> they freed Java :)
Yep. They need to figure that one out. I heard secondhand that I
believe Mark Reinhold said that they would fix this. I'm not sure
how. Should be interesting.
geir
>
> Thanks,
> dims
>
> [1] http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/faq.jsp#h
> [2] https://openjdk.dev.java.net/source/browse/openjdk/jdk/trunk/
> j2se/src/share/classes/com/sun/org/apache/
> --
> Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com