From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 15:38:20 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3173D16A4CE for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:38:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.69]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDB6A43D39 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:38:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from truk@optonline.net) Received: from focus (ool-182e24b7.dyn.optonline.net [24.46.36.183]) by mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)) with SMTP id <0I9Y00AGIE3QQI@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for java@freebsd.org; Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:38:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:38:15 -0500 From: Kurt Miller To: java@freebsd.org Message-id: <065001c4f4ce$e7bb0410$1d0110ac@focus> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <41DE4504.5040300@ebs.gr> Subject: Re: FW: Sun revokes FreeBSD license for Java X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 15:38:20 -0000 From: "Panagiotis Astithas" > Achilleus Mantzios wrote: > > Most users are quite happy with jdk14 i suppose. > > Although I am one of those users happily using the jdk14 port, I can't > say that I find the situation satisfying. When I am trying to pitch a > Java solution on FreeBSD to a customer I have to ask them to have the > jdk preinstalled for me, since I can't legally redistribute it. Clients > who don't have an existing FreeBSD installation or don't care about the > solution's underlying OS (which is why they usually pick Java in the > first place), wonder why on earth they should not go with Linux instead. > > For developer's like myself the port is fine. For managers (either > selling or bying products) it is a nightmare. Personally, I consider > Alexey's financial support and the binary distribution license as the > most important thing that the FreeBSD Foundation has ever done for the > future of the community. I completely agree. However I think that the lack of a binary distribution is far more important then many people realize. The SCSL doesn't only restrict the distribution of the jdk's built from ports, it also restricts the use of them too. IANAL, but as I understand the SCSL it contains three licenses; Research Use, Internal Deployment Use and Commercial Use. Research Use allow an individual to use the jdk and modify the source of the jdk. It also allows for personal and individual use of the binaries via the Research Use definition. Once you want to use the binaries for anything other then that, you fall into the other licenses and they require the TCK's be run (see Attachment C, 2.1). Having the Foundation distribute the compliant binaries means businesses can use the jdk's. The alternatives are not good. Each business would need to contact Sun and license the TCK's if they want to use the jdk's. I would be delighted if someone could find another interpretation of the SCSL that allows a business to use the jdk's without the TCK's being run. In fact I hope I'm wrong. -Kurt