| |||||||||||||
Apache resigns from the Java Community Process executive committeeApache resigns from the Java Community Process executive committeePosted Dec 10, 2010 16:02 UTC (Fri) by paulj (subscriber, #341)In reply to: Apache resigns from the Java Community Process executive committee by DOT Parent article: Apache resigns from the Java Community Process executive committee
OpenJDK gets an Oracle patent licence because of its GPL licensing - nothing to do with TCK.
Other implementations, i.e. those independent of OpenJDK, *may* get a patent licence from Oracle if they show they conform, which requires the TCK.
(Log in to post comments)
Apache resigns from the Java Community Process executive committee Posted Dec 13, 2010 4:38 UTC (Mon) by aliguori (subscriber, #30636) [Link]
It's a bit more subtle than that. Just about any software that you distribute would carry an implicit patent license (at least in the US) for patents you owned. The GPL goes a step further and says that the patent license must be non-discriminatory to future downstreams which basically is anything that can claim to be a derivative product.
So in theory, even if I just copied a few lines of code from OpenJDK and implemented everything else from scratch, I still get full patent licenses. The catch is, if I copy anything from a GPL software, my license must be GPL-compatible and the end-result is something that is effectively GPL'd.
By the virtue of being Apache Licensed, there is no way Harmony can claim to be a derivative product of OpenJDK which means it doesn't get to share the patent license. If they integrated two lines of OpenJDK code and relicensed to GPL, they'd be covered.
|
|||||||||||||