 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / May 2005JVM sources
Hi, Where can I find C sources for JVM 1.4 for Windows ? Thanks Xavier > Where can I find C sources for JVM 1.4 for Windows ? http://www.sun.com/software/communitysource/j2se/java2/download.xml  SignatureRegards, John McGrath > > Where can I find C sources for JVM 1.4 for Windows ? > > http://www.sun.com/software/communitysource/j2se/java2/download.xml But read the license /very/ carefully. IIRC (which I may not, and in any case IANAL), it pretty much prevents you ever working on any JVM implementation again (including free ones). The 1.5 source is available under a different license which is not so damaging. I don't know if that is available as an option for the earlier releases. -- chris > The 1.5 source is available under a different license which is not so damaging. > I don't know if that is available as an option for the earlier releases. Sun also has a new contribution process with an own contributor agreement for Java 1.6. A very nice idea - until you find such "wounderful" wording in the contributor agreement: > 3. You hereby grant to Sun, and to any party who receives Your Contribution, a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, no-charge, royalty-free, patent license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer Your Contribution, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by You that are infringed by Your Contribution alone or by combination of Your Contribution with the work to which such Contributions were submitted. No patent license is granted: (a) for any code that a licensee has deleted from Your Contribution; or (b) for infringements caused by either: (i) third party modifications of Your Contribution, or (ii) the combination of Your Contribution with other software or other devices if such combination causes the infringement. I have not the remotest idea what they are talking about. 70+ words in one sentence. It not only took a lawyer to write it, it takes one or two to understand it :-( And Sun thinks this will motivate people to contribute? /Thomas SignatureThe comp.lang.java.gui FAQ: ftp://ftp.cs.uu.nl/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS/computer-lang/java/gui/faq > Sun also has a new contribution process with an own contributor > agreement for Java 1.6. A very nice idea - until you find such [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I have not the remotest idea what they are talking about. I /think/ it may mean that if you submit code to Sun that infringes someone else's patent, then Sun can still distribute and use the code as widely as they want, but /you/ have to pay all the patent license fees. I'm not a lawyer, and I could easily be wrong, but that's what it looks like to me. Enticing... -- chris > I'm not a lawyer, and I could easily be wrong, but that's what it looks like to > me. Enticing... I think we have to be glad that Sun doesn't ask for our first-born, or do they? Seriously, how can Sun expect people to sign this? The other paragraphs in that document are similar: "moral rights", "common law", "without application of choice of law rules", "duty whatsoever to render an accounting to the other party" :-( It is the same story as with the JCP agreement. That one also requires a bunch of lawyers for deciphering. Either Sun doesn't know what they are doing, or they still just pay lip-service that they want to have more outside contributions. Since Sun says that even e-mails to the 1.6 jdk project and "postings" are covered by the agreement, I don't think it is a good idea to communicate with this people at all without a lawyer :-( /Thomas SignatureThe comp.lang.java.gui FAQ: ftp://ftp.cs.uu.nl/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS/computer-lang/java/gui/faq >> The 1.5 source is available under a different license which is not so >> damaging. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > to understand it :-( And Sun thinks this will motivate people to > contribute? IANAL, but ... The main point seems to be that Sun is licensed to do more or less anything it wants to with the contribution, relative to any and all *patents* on the contents that you are able to license to them. Furthermore, as a special case, anyone who receives the contribution under the agreement terms (initially only Sun) may pass it on to others such that the same terms apply to them. Secondarily, the agreement appears rather protective of the contributor, especially in that it explicitly does not obligate the contributor to provide a patent license where the contribution itself is non-infringing but subsequent modification or combination with other work produces an infringement. SignatureJohn Bollinger jobollin@indiana.edu Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.