Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I'm not sure if this question is stupied or was asked and answered
already before, but do we know (for sure) the reason why Sun wants or
needs to restrict the "field of use" of compliant Java
implementations?

I can think of two main reasons:

1) They want to protect their revenue from Java in embedded systems.

2) They see software patents as applicable only when the software in
question is an integral part of a physical system, and use the FOU as
a way to avoid hitting the patent minefield.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

["Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>]

On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> I always figured the nuclear exclusion was to avoid the lawsuits and
> PR that would come from a headline like "Deadly reactor meltdown
> traced to flaw in Sun Microsystems' Java programming language".  You'd
> have to be crazy to run MY code in a nuclear reactor, that's for sure!

It is an insurance issue.  Sun probably has a corporate liability
policy that excludes a set of applications in exchange for lower
premiums, and some bright sod at Sun decided to include those
exclusions in their corporate licenses (as if such a thing could
ever be excluded in practice).

....Roy

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

[Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>]

I always figured the nuclear exclusion was to avoid the lawsuits and
PR that would come from a headline like "Deadly reactor meltdown
traced to flaw in Sun Microsystems' Java programming language".  You'd
have to be crazy to run MY code in a nuclear reactor, that's for sure!

Thanks,
     Aaron

On 6/29/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 28, 2007, at 10:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm not sure if this question is stupied or was asked and answered
> > already before, but do we know (for sure) the reason why Sun wants or
> > needs to restrict the "field of use" of compliant Java
> > implementations?
> >
> > I can think of two main reasons:
> >
> > 1) They want to protect their revenue from Java in embedded systems.
> >
> > 2) They see software patents as applicable only when the software in
> > question is an integral part of a physical system, and use the FOU as
> > a way to avoid hitting the patent minefield.
>
> Software is a patent minefield.
>
> Passing the TCK grants the necessary IP from the EG members - it
> doesn't confer any protection from infringing patents held by others.
>
> So I'm going to go with #1.
>
> geir
>
>

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

[Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>]

On 6/30/07, robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> #1 seems most likely but there is another possibility:
>
> 3 sun want to own the only open source implementation of java

We can publicly speculate until the cows come home about why Sun wants
it there - but that's not going to help us craft our policy as their
internal justification is largely irrelevant to us.  -- justin

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

[robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>]

On 6/29/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2007, at 10:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm not sure if this question is stupied or was asked and answered
> > already before, but do we know (for sure) the reason why Sun wants or
> > needs to restrict the "field of use" of compliant Java
> > implementations?
> >
> > I can think of two main reasons:
> >
> > 1) They want to protect their revenue from Java in embedded systems.
> >
> > 2) They see software patents as applicable only when the software in
> > question is an integral part of a physical system, and use the FOU as
> > a way to avoid hitting the patent minefield.
>
> Software is a patent minefield.
>
> Passing the TCK grants the necessary IP from the EG members - it
> doesn't confer any protection from infringing patents held by others.
>
> So I'm going to go with #1.


#1 seems most likely but there is another possibility:

3 sun want to own the only open source implementation of java

- robert

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

["Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@pobox.com>]

On Jun 28, 2007, at 10:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm not sure if this question is stupied or was asked and answered
> already before, but do we know (for sure) the reason why Sun wants or
> needs to restrict the "field of use" of compliant Java
> implementations?
>
> I can think of two main reasons:
>
> 1) They want to protect their revenue from Java in embedded systems.
>
> 2) They see software patents as applicable only when the software in
> question is an integral part of a physical system, and use the FOU as
> a way to avoid hitting the patent minefield.

Software is a patent minefield.

Passing the TCK grants the necessary IP from the EG members - it  
doesn't confer any protection from infringing patents held by others.

So I'm going to go with #1.

geir

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

[Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>]

I've unsubscribed this address.

On 29/06/2007, at 6:59 AM, Admin from Chefs Life wrote:

> Please check out www.chefslife.com its a new networking website for  
> chefs.
>
> The best place on the net for chefs to chat, meet other chefs,  
> store and
> save your recipes, job hunt and use the forum.
>
> www.chefslife.com the newest hang out for chefs, built and run by  
> Chefs its
> 100% free to join
>
> Sign up now
>
> www.chefslife.com
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jukka Zitting"  
> <ju...@gmail.com>
> To: <jc...@apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:57 PM
> Subject: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction
>
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm not sure if this question is stupied or was asked and answered
>> already before, but do we know (for sure) the reason why Sun wants or
>> needs to restrict the "field of use" of compliant Java
>> implementations?
>> I can think of two main reasons:
>> 1) They want to protect their revenue from Java in embedded systems.
>> 2) They see software patents as applicable only when the software in
>> question is an integral part of a physical system, and use the FOU as
>> a way to avoid hitting the patent minefield.
>> BR,
>> Jukka Zitting
>>
>

Re: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction

[Admin from Chefs Life <ad...@chefslife.com>]

Please check out www.chefslife.com its a new networking website for chefs.

The best place on the net for chefs to chat, meet other chefs, store and
save your recipes, job hunt and use the forum.

www.chefslife.com the newest hang out for chefs, built and run by Chefs its
100% free to join

Sign up now

www.chefslife.com




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jukka Zitting" <ju...@gmail.com>
To: <jc...@apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:57 PM
Subject: Reason for Sun's FOU restriction


> Hi,
> 
> I'm not sure if this question is stupied or was asked and answered
> already before, but do we know (for sure) the reason why Sun wants or
> needs to restrict the "field of use" of compliant Java
> implementations?
> 
> I can think of two main reasons:
> 
> 1) They want to protect their revenue from Java in embedded systems.
> 
> 2) They see software patents as applicable only when the software in
> question is an integral part of a physical system, and use the FOU as
> a way to avoid hitting the patent minefield.
> 
> BR,
> 
> Jukka Zitting
> 
> 
>