Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

JBoss Offers Lawsuit Indemnification

Posted by simoniker on from the protected-shielded-sorted- dept.

prostoalex writes "JBoss Group offered its customers indemnification from potential legal problems related to patent violations and copyright lawsuits. According to Bob Bickel, JBoss VP, the move is intended to give customers more peace of mind when deciding whether to go with open-source software." The article also mentions Jboss' legal challenge to Apache Geronimo, of which Bickel said "...the letter to the Apache Software Foundation was never intended to be made public and said the conflict has been blown out of proportion."

17 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Empty offers.. by grub · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Indemnification from who and what exactly? That's like offering supernova insurance, only suckers will buy.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Empty offers.. by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 4, Funny
      That's like offering supernova insurance, only suckers will buy.

      Sure, you say that, but I'll be laughing all the way to the bank the next time our sun explodes.

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    2. Re:Empty offers.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Does anybody know where I can get a good rate on supernova insurance? I'm currently paying $350 USD a month for full nova and supernova coverage, but I think I could do better. Plus, I'm a sitting duck when it comes to black holes.

    3. Re:Empty offers.. by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 3, Funny
      Hey, that's required in the Beatelguis system! I was going to buy a summer place out there, but between the commute and the cost of insurance it was out of the question.

      I'd laugh but my great grandfather had a place out where the crab nebula is now. It had some lovely blue siding. It blew all over the fricken place.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  2. Just like SCO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This whole "Pay us and you won't be sued" thing sure sounds like white-collar extortion to me.

    1. Re:Just like SCO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This whole "Pay us and you won't be sued" thing sure sounds like white-collar extortion to me.

      Slow down and read it again.

      They aren't charging anything for idemnification. Even if they did, it wouldn't be anything remotely like SCO. SCO is the one doing the suing. Companies like IBM and HP are protecting their customers from SCO. A more apt analogy would compare JBoss to IBM or HP in this case.

    2. Re:Just like SCO! by molarmass192 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you read the article??? They're not threatening to sue anybody. They're offering to indemnify their customers in the event that JBoss code is found to to infringe on patents or copyrights. They're doing to same thing HP did with it's Linux customers here. If customers want it, it's available. JBoss isn't the one who'd be doing the suing.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
  3. So, it's a trend... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...but is it a good or bad one?

    It mollifies fears about switching to open-source software, but it does leave projects without a financial backing out in the cold.

    --
    tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
    1. Re:So, it's a trend... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mollifies fears? It's inventing fears! Fears based on an premise that flies in the face of legal tradition.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  4. not copied? by tarzan353 · · Score: 2, Redundant

    You're assuming by "copying" he means "cut and paste." Not at all. Copying could be somebody who read the JBoss code (which is open, and pretty good. I read quite a bit of it myself trying to decide whether it was a viable alternative to the ghastly expensive BEA WebSphere) writing identical functions for Geronimo. A bit like aspiring artists copying a famous painting, only much more illegal. Alternatively, it could be some well meaning developer thinking that "clean room" just means he has to retype it.

    I've seen a lot of aspiring programmers retype what's "in the book" and consider it their own work. It's entirely possible a contributor to Geronimo did the exact same thing.

  5. Perception by panxerox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's just about customer perception, they know sco dosent have a case so why not offer it, no loss for them and only positive benifits.

    --
    "It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
  6. In a way by Dagrush · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm glad it sounds like extortion. It'd be a sad day when you needed protection to use open source.

  7. RTFA bois by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    Only 50-100 commercial customers are 'covered' by this. Anyone else who has simply downloaded JBoss and uses it (which is the vast majority of their 'user base') is still screwed if the reason for this actually comes to pass.

    IOW, if you want to be 'indemnified' then you have to buy JBoss, which is kinda dumb since it's supposed to be 'free'. Heh. Yay open source!

    1. Re:RTFA bois by enjo13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How else do you expect this to work? JBoss is going to cover the costs of lawsuits for those that never contributed to JBoss the company in the first place?

      JBoss is 'free', and if you choose to use in the 'free beer' sense then you take on the risk of dealing with lawsuits. That's pefectly in keeping with the ideology of open source.. with freedom comes responsibility, and by taking advantage of something that is free you assume the risk of whatever comes out of that.

      If you choose to use JBoss the group, then they will guarantee you that it won't end up costing you lawsuit money if the lawyers come knocking. The code is free, the project is free, but the group that is using the project as a business is not. They charge money because this is how they make their living. Indemnification is just one more value-add that the JBoss commercial entity provides, and it's a good one in my opinion.

      --
      Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
  8. Question by TnkMkr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have a questin about this whole indemnification thing. Why would I as someone who purchased or was even give a product from a comercial entity be worried about being sued if the comercial entity was using tech in violation of a patent?

    I mean as I understand it, it would be like all of the people who own a Xboxs are suddenly told that they have to pay Sony and additional $200 or be sued because MS used some propritary hardware in their counsle. Why wouldn't just MS be stuck holding the bag? Are not the customers protected by a good faith purchase agreement or something? Or would the task of sueing MS to get your $200 dollars back be left up to you (or some class action lawsuit)?

    I am sure I am oversimplifying the matter, but I'm hopping this be a starting point for an explination.

    Thanks

    1. Re:Question by dissy · · Score: 2

      > Why would I as someone who purchased or was even give a product from a comercial
      > entity be worried about being sued if the comercial entity was using tech in
      > violation of a patent?

      To answer that, the question can actually be shortened to this:

      # Why would I as someone who purchased or was even give a product from a comercial
      # entity be worried about being sued

      Someone can sue anyone for anything. Winning is up to the lawyers and judge.
      Reasons for being sued dont play too much into things for most of the people that would be sued.

      If you sued me for example, I could only afford to pay for legal defense for a short time. So if your reason for suing me wasnt outright incorrect or already covered in a different legal case, then I can only fight for a short time.
      Compared to the companys doing the suing, who can afford to do so as long as needed, I would lose the case.

      Once I can no longer defend myself with a person that knows all the details of every law (IE a lawyer) then the lawyers of the company doing the suing will do everything possible to find technicalitys that have no bearing to the issue, yet are legal none the less.

      Imagine that hard ass teacher from school that you would expect a "Two of your five hundred I's are not dotted. zero credit for the paper!"
      Judges have to follow the stupid laws in those cases, and only a person who choses law for his/her career can hope to know them all.
      This is by design and on purpose.

      If it was truly left to being right and wrong, there would be no problems.

      I'm sure i'm oversimplifying things too, but for the most part that is the reason.

  9. Two Obvious goals here... by rkischuk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1) To frighten the ignorant into purchasing support so that they are now indemnified.

    2) To give news outlets another opportunity to mention the friction between JBoss and Geronimo. Though they outwardly state that it's been blown out of proportion, the very mention of it in the same press release has the insidious implication that if you choose Geronimo instead of JBoss, you won't be indemnified, and JBoss could come calling in the near future.

    --
    Seen any BadMarketing lately?