Re: The Sun Community Source License is Very Bad News
Richard Stallman writes:
> I see two possibilities here that call for different actions:
> 1. Some Sun lawyer was overzealous.
> 2. Sun is making a serious attempt to revive interface copyright.
How did you arrive at this conclusion? I read it as putting the
specification *document* under the same license as the software. The
license refers to 'Specifications' (note capitalization) not
'specifications'. This is analogous to putting the documentation for a GPL
program under the GPL. It does not prevent you from reading the
'Specifications' and then expressing the ideas in your own words.
Note that I have replaced debian-private in the header with debian-legal.
This does not belong on private, IMHO, and as it is cross-posted to
debian-java there is no privacy issue.
--
John Hasler This posting is in the public domain.
john@dhh.gt.org Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Reply to: