[Discussioni] [Fwd: Re: alternative to java]

[Marco Ermini]

Alessandro Ronchi disse:
> Il gio, 2004-04-22 alle 15:11, Gian Uberto Lauri ha scritto:
>
>> Potrebbe salvo brevetti... E altri accordi commerciali. Occhio che IBM
>> ha  insegnato a Microsoft  tutto quello  che Redmond  sa ed  ha ancora
>> qualcosa nella manica...
>
> Attenzione: i brevetti qui non c'entrano. Se può rilasciare la sua
> versione con licenza proprietaria, allora può farlo anche con licenza
> libera.
[...]

No, ha ragione Gian Uberto (forse non ci sono di mezzo brevetti, ma marchi
sicuramente). Il motivo è presto detto. Se (come in effetti è) il suo
prodotto ha ottenuto la certificazione di Sun ("the product... passed...
the Java compatible test suites and carry the Java compatible logo"). Se
vuoi avere il "Java Logo" con la parola "Java" nel mezzo devi avere il
beneplacito di Sun, visto che "Java", come marchio e sicuramente anche
come brevetto, è di Sun.

Notare che i sorgenti della JDK Sun sono liberamente disponibili. Si
possono benissimo modificare e ricompilare, ma non puoi ridistribuire la
tua creazione: per farlo hai appunto bisogno del beneplacito di Sun - in
sostanza devi portare a loro ogni tuo "miglioramento" o "cambiamento".

http://wwws.sun.com/software/communitysource/overview.html
http://wwws.sun.com/software/communitysource/principles.html

"Open Source licensing recognizes that different organizations have
different concerns, and therefore the source code is freely available for
any party to do what it will. Open Source licensing grew out of the
tradition of shareware and free software, which were movements that
embodied political beliefs about what can and cannot be owned.

Open Source licensing, on the other hand, does not embody beliefs about
ownership aside from recognizing the fact that some organizations wish to
own software and others don't. However, Open Source licensing does
recognize that certain common elements - for example, infrastructure - are
important for a number of parties and that those elements should be freely
and openly available.

With Open Source licensing, the source code is available for any use, but
there are incentives to "give back" to the Open Source community those
improvements that are for the common good. Most importantly, the Open
Source approach recognizes that the primary value of a piece of software
is the expertise represented by the people who developed it. Thus, even
when source is out in the open, the value still remains with those who can
expertly manipulate it."

[...]

"The Community Source licensing model takes the advantages from each of
the proprietary and Open Source models and eliminates the disadvantages.

In Community Source licensing there is a community of common interests
centered around an infrastructure which is provided by a particular
organization, called the developing organization. A group of other
organizations may join the community, and generally those organizations
will have an interest in building businesses around the infrastructure."

[...]

"With a Research Use license, a developer may take any approach to using
the source code in order to determine whether the technology can be of
use; in fact, the developer can do all the work leading up to deployment
with such a license.

The license and source code are available through the Net, and so the
transition from interest to participation is immediate. Access is clearly
open."

[...]

"Proprietary modifications including performance improvements are allowed.

Unlike the proprietary licensing model, all community members can make
such changes to the original source base (or upgrades to it) because they
have access to it. Unlike the Open Source model, such changes are not
required to be given back to the community, though it is encouraged. (Note
however, that error corrections to the original source code base must
always be returned to the community.)"

"The original source base is fully the responsibility of the developing
organization  [la Sun, n.b.] which can move that base forward; the
community may participate in those activities, accelerating them as
necessary. Because commercial users of the technology are required to
update to newer base technology in new products, after a reasonable delay,
the platform can evolve."

http://wwws.sun.com/software/communitysource/faq.html#0q6

"7. Q. Do I have to license the code to get Sun to adopt my modifications?
A. Yes, it is necessary to license the source code in order to be able to
actually make modifications. Only community source code licensees will
have access to the modifications made by other community licensees."

(interessante):

"8. Q. If Sun uses my modifications, do I get paid?
A. No. As a member of the community, any modifications you decide to share
are posted to benefit the community at large. This is covered under the
"Contributor Grant" section of the license."

---

In sostanza, puoi partecipare allo sviluppo della JDK, puoi migliorarla, e
decidere se tenere il tuo miglioramento come proprietario; in ogni caso
devi riferire a Sun se vuoi ridistribuirlo in quanto proprietaria del
marchio "Java". Altrimenti puoi lasciare che Sun lo ridistribuisca, a suo
piacimento e discrezione, al resto della comunità.

Devi partecipare attraverso il JCP:

http://www.jcp.org/en/home/index

e quindi "subirne" la licenza.



ciao
-- 
Marco Ermini
http://www.markoer.org
Dubium sapientiae initium. (Descartes)
<< This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in
error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original.
Any other use of the email by you is prohibited. >>