[ajug-members] Rumour control was A Gosling sighting in Atlanta...

[Burr Sutter]

Oracle runs on GPL linux and doesn't have to opensource their database code.

And most of the major software vendors are certified on Linux these days with no fear of the viral nature of the license.

As Bjorn stated, if you modify Linux or in this case the JVM then you need to donate back those enhancements to the community.

Burr


-----Original Message-----
From: ajug-members-bounces at ajug.org <ajug-members-bounces at ajug.org>
To: General AJUG membership forum (100-200 messages/month) <ajug-members at ajug.org>
Sent: Wed Sep 20 12:13:28 2006
Subject: Re: [ajug-members] Rumour control was A Gosling sighting in Atlanta...

As I understand it, the licensing issue is with the JVM, not with the
Java language.  Sun is looking to provide the JVM source code under an
OSI-approved license.  This is very much like the case of using Linux:
because you don't actually *use* the JVM's source code, your code is
not "infected" with the license.  And binary "code" is not covered by
GPL.  Hence there is no business impact from this pending change.

And as far as the "infection" goes, that only applies to GPL-ed code
that you /modify/ -- not just code that you use.  If you use GPL code
(and especially LGPL code) as part of your system, you can avoid
violating the letter of GPL by simply making the unmodified original
source that you're wrapping available along with your own proprietary
bolt-on modules, if that's what you want to do.  Even the GPLv2
explicitly includes that condition.  And if you do make modifications
to a GPLed project you can limit the scope of those changes such that
they don't infect your proprietary value-added components. (This last
is easiest if you simply contribute your mods back to the project from
which they came.)

On 9/20/06, Vincent <vincent at xaymaca.com> wrote:
>
> Finally my biggest fear is the viral nature of the GPL. I have not
> really had a chance to look at version 3 , so I may be totally wrong.
> On some of my projects, I deliberately look for BSD or commercial
> licenses (that we can purchase) for things that have to be distributed
> to a customer. This snippet from a conversation on IRC
> (irc://irc.darkmyst.org/funkycodemonkey) kind of illustrates my fear:
>
>
> larryBoy>       i can't use GPL
> larryBoy>       or the project becomes GPL
> GhettoJava>     you can't use linux either?
> GhettoJava>     that's gPL
> larryBoy>       not as part of the project
> larryBoy>       I *do* use java.lang.Object
> larryBoy>       if it's GPL
> larryBoy>       uhh
> larryBoy>       so is everything that extends it
>
> Again, Neither I nor no one I know has even glanced at GPLv3, so this
> may all be mute. Also, I'm not a GPL hater, I love linux and the GNU
> tool set, it's the lawyers that worry about it.
> Thanks,
> Vincent
_______________________________________________
ajug-members mailing list
ajug-members at ajug.org
http://www.ajug.org/mailman/listinfo/ajug-members
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ajug.org/pipermail/ajug-members/attachments/20060920/517b298c/attachment.html