Re: clickthrough license

[Dalibor Topic]

David Holmes wrote:

> > GNU is not Unix, and GNU Classpath is not (the core) Java (library).
> > We just don't have a cute acronym to express that.
>
>
> 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.
>
> Now I don't personally believe it would be in Sun's interests to come down
> on GNU Classpath and "prosecute" this, rather it would be in Sun's (and the
> Java Community's) best interests to have GNU Classpath be conformant with
> the spec license and pass the TCK. But I'm concerned that the FSF's politics
> on all this might deny the possibility of this ever happening. But that's
> not my direct concern.

I get a few mails that ask me how legal Kaffe is a few times a year, so 
I hope this can serve as a 'no idea, hypothetical question' template for 
GNU Classpath, too :)

The ambiguousness in Sun's licenses surrounding Java technology is 
probably intentional, as it allows Sun's legal team to pick the battles 
they want to fight. The FSF can't do anything about other people's 
licenses that are designed to be open to interpretation, afaict, and it 
can't really tell you how the other people will interpret their licenses 
if you end up in court. Sun's licenses are ulrimately their own to 
figure out. :)

I guess that most people would agree that conforming to the specs is a 
great thing, and passing the TCK would be quite neat, too, as then VMs 
using GNU Classpath could claim to interpret the spec in similar ways as 
Sun does[1]. But it's not up to GNU Classpath to set the rules here, 
because GNU Classpath does not have a stake in Java(TM). If and when Sun 
wants, say, SableVM or Kaffe or gcj or IKVM or any other VM on GNU 
Classpath to be conformant to their specifications wrt to passing the 
TCK, they'll make their TCK available under an acceptable[2] license, 
and then something can (and probably will) be done about it.

FSF's politics have no influence on how Sun licenses their code, afaict. 
All the FSF can do is to say: 'that's OK', or 'that's not good enough 
for these reasons'. I'd be very surprised if giving up freedom in 
exchange for access to a marketing initiative, or for a promise of 
compatibility/scare of incompatibility ever became part of FSF politics. 
If Sun makes offers that demand such things, I'd guess that those offers 
are likely to be politely declined.

But that's OK. It's up to Sun to figure out how to license their code in 
ways that coincide with their intentions, hopes and fears. I'm sure that 
they'll find a good way to strike an acceptable balance *eventually*. 
That might take a few more years.[3] But there is no need to push Sun to 
hurry up, in my opinion. They'll get there on their own terms, when they 
are ready. They have enough clever people working for them to figure out 
what needs to be done, and how to go about it without being constantly 
whacked from the sidelines to 'open up Java already'.

For a bit of a silver lining, the 1.5 JSR indicates that the TCK may be 
released under a license that doesn't contaminate everything it touches 
with the SCSL, but it remains to be seen if that is actually going to be 
the case.

Till then, it's all 'what-if' speculation. Sun has tolerated[4] 
clean-room efforts like Kaffe since 1996, without threatening legal 
action, afaict, so I don't see why they should change their minds now. 
Sun's OpenOffice.org developers have recently created a Java vendor 
interface to make it easier for free runtime developers to plug their 
VMs into OOo, in order to get OOo to run on free runtimes, and further 
it's reach. I'm working on it from the Kaffe side. I doubt that would be 
happening if Sun regarded free runtimes as illegal thieves of their 
specification. I'd say that Kaffe or SableVM or gcj or IKVM are not 
threatening Sun's products, they are rather playing in a completely 
different league, by being free software, and by explicitely *not being* 
Java(TM).

To recapitulate: Kaffe in not Java(TM). Kaffe is not Pepsi(TM). Kaffe is 
also not Coca Cola(TM) and definitely not a BigMac(TM). :)

Kaffe is Kaffe. If it works for you, that's cool, if it doesn't let's 
fix it. But noone should claim that Kaffe is Java(TM), because that's 
simply not true[5].

cheers,
dalibor topic

[1] Which only matters if you are dealing in marketing anyway, as then 
you can slap cute Sun logos on your VM and make certain claims about 
your VM without fear that Sun's legal team will slap you for abusing 
their trade marks. But a cute logo doesn't mean that a VM is any good in 
practice, it just means that the VM vendor decided to 'tap into the 
power of the brand' and do whatever is required to get the right to slap 
that logo on their product. :)
[2] Which means no ambiguous 'NOTICE FROM SUN MICROSYSTEMS' stunts like 
the one someone pulled on Geronimo & JOnAS. :)
[3] My conservative guess is 2012, as according to X-Files, the world 
ends then, so why not try to get all the good karma you can get while 
you can? :)
[4] And I can see a sun.com address in kaffe's changelogs wrt to bug 
reports, so I'm sure Sun knew about Kaffe for a loong time. Jonathan 
Schwartz knows about it, for example, and it doesn't get very much 
higher up at Sun than Jonathan. I didn't get an impression that he or 
say, Simon Phipps, or Calvin Austin saw free runtimes as a threat to Sun 
or Java. I'd consider it more likely that when GNU Classpath covers all 
of Java 1.6/1.7, Sun will work with the FSF to get it into the JCP 
process and certified, and may tweak the FSF-incompatible parts of it 
like they did for the ASF. Cooperation to further Java, rather then 
whacking each other silly, is obviously in everyone's best interest, so 
I'd assume that Sun will do the right thing when they are confident 
about it being the right time to do it, not any sooner. Given that GNU 
Classpath is still a few years away from covering all of 1.5, now is 
probably not the right time to put any pressure on Sun, IMHO.
[5] And would expose them to rightful attacks from Sun's legal 
department. They need to go after violators of their trade marks or they 
stand a chance of losing them.