RE: clickthrough license

[David Holmes]

> > Being involved in this at present with another JSR I can assure
> > you that the JCP does require a click-through license for downloading
> > specs.
>
> I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think it would be useful if you could
> point to a specific document that states such a requriement.

I should said PMO rather than JCP. The JCP document itself doesn't cover
this, however the PMO seems to require it. If you look at the Spec lead
Guide on jcp.org you'll see that for Proposed Final Draft "The PMO will
provide the spec license ..." and then for Final Approval Ballot "The PMO
hosts the Final Approval Ballot for you, and uses Sun's general FCS license
unless you provide your own FCS license.".

On other words, the specification licenses are provided by the PMO not the
JCP itself. (Note that the specification license is distinct from the RI and
TCK licenses.) You'd need to contact the PMO directly to clarify this and to
see what possible licenses exist.

> > I don't believe that not saying the "Java" word when describing what GNU
> > Classpath is lets you off the hook here. If nothing else the classes and
> > API's in the java* namespaces would fall under Sun's copyright.
>
> You mean Sun's trademark, not copyright, of course.

I do? The API's are not as far as I am aware trademarked. It seems to me
that defining a set of API's that match Sun's Java API's would be copying
them - hence infringing on copyright. But I'm no IP lawyer.

Oh and I now see that every JavaDoc page states "Use is subject to license
terms" at the bottom with a link to the spec license. So whether you read
the javadocs online, download them yourself via the clikc-through, download
an actual specification or read an official book, then these API's are
always covered by Sun's specification license.

David Holmes