decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more... 		decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My Desk"
Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 02:04 AM EDT

There is a review, "First look: Sun Java Desktop System Release 2," on Linux.com today, and it noticed some issues with the license. In a box, called "Restricted License", the writer, Jem Matzan, says it is the most restrictive license he has ever seen:

"Sun JDS Release 2 is the most heavily restrictive software package I have ever seen. Sun takes the heavyweight championship belt for the worst software license ever to have crossed my desk. . . .

"The licensing is worse than anything I've seen come out of Redmond -- or anywhere else -- thus far. If Microsoft's EULA says, 'you can't do anything with this software,' Sun's JDS license says, 'I'll tell you every single thing you can't do, and that means everything, including unlikely possibilities, and while we're at it here is a list of unreasonable demands and obligations for you. And get me another beer while you're up.'"

There are so many restrictions that the license requires a booklet of amendments listing all the other things you can't do under this or that special circumstance. The wording, he says, is unusually complex, and he suggests you have your legal eagles look the license over before you even consider making a buying recommendation on it.

The license, he writes, "is deceptive":

"It is worded initially in such a way as to make you believe that it governs the entire operating environment -- everything on the CDs. Further in there is a quick phrase that states that Sun's binary code license only governs the included software that is not already under another license. That leaves a staggeringly small portion of the operating environment under the governance of Sun's license: the Java Desktop System Configuration Manager and the Sun Control Station. Everything else falls only under the control and jurisdiction of its governing license (mostly the GNU GPL). But if you didn't know beforehand that GNU/Linux was under the GPL, you would have no way of knowing that by looking at Sun's license. All of the "other" licenses that the software falls under are buried two directories deep on the first disc in a file called THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME. Short of breaking the law, there is nothing more that Sun could have done to obscure the fact that JDS2 is mostly Free Software."

He states clearly: "If you're considering buying this for your personal use and your rights are important to you, Java Desktop System 2 is not for you."


  


Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My Desk" | 363 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Here Please
Authored by: iceworm on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 02:41 AM EDT
First post corrections please.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Links Here
Authored by: DeepBlue on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 02:46 AM EDT
Clickable Links in this thread please

---
Even David needed some stones in his sling to topple Goliath ........

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My Desk"
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 02:55 AM EDT
From what I hear, it won't run on most computers anyways.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:03 AM EDT
any chance "we" could get ahold of the liscence and analyze it?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Open Source Business Model
Authored by: Greg on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:19 AM EDT
So I have been thinking about what TYPE of business
model Open Source is: Corporation, small business, etc.

It became clear to me today.

Open Source is a Cooperative Business TYPE.

I say this because as you look at the
different businesses around the world
there are only very few that behave like
Open Source. A Coop is important in that
it has served the farming community to
prevent a single middleman from gaining
power over multiple farmers.

There are coops to purchase farming
equipment and there are coops that
farmers sell their good to ensure that their
produce makes it to the market at a good price.

In software there is no real middleman.
But there are software companies that
attempt to gain power over companies
when selling their software services.

So the advent of Linux is that effort
to ensure that the operating system
as a technology does not become controlled
by a single entity such that the
consumers of that technology have no
choice. Companies pool their resources
and their intellectual property to
create a form of a Coop that can not
only protect those companies that
want to participate but they
also allow them to gain from the
products that are created.

Open Source needs to be viewed
as a Coop type of business model.

This concept will stand up in court.

And by the way this idea of Coop is
what Sun is attempting to side step
with this release of their Java Desktop.

In a standard asset based ownership the
need is to create value that can be
protected.

But Sun must not be persuaded by M$ and their
ignorance to the changes in the market place.

The Open Source Process as a form of Coop
will dominate core technologies such that
consumers and corporations will benefit
as the technical value drives to $0 for
each innovation.

Greg

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My Desk"
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:33 AM EDT
well. the desktop looks sickeningly alike to windows 2000 or maybe xp, and since
the installation didn't work for the reviewer, why would i want to switch over?
one system that i wouldn't want my biz to rely on for another, sheesh.

i, like the reviewer, have also had problems with linux installs and sata
drives, but if i can get a knoppix live cd to boot on a sata system, why can't
sun generate something that would work flawlessly on any machine for any user?
has even the mighty sun given up on supplying a working product? already?

when a large corporation that sells software generates a product that doesn't
run well, and then offers a jump through hoops support system, it makes me
angry, not just disappointed. the disappointment comes from this being sun,
whose servers i've relied on for years, and the fact that they didn't do
anything to the desktop to make it look even a little unlike win2k. they could
have dragged the taskbar to the left verticle edge just to make it 'look'
different... anything would have been nice. a black desktop?

i know they want to seem like they are offering a replacement package, but it's
not like apple has had to succome to making their interface look exactly like
older winx versions to still sell computers and an os that all ranges of users
can be productive with. i personally don't think sun has to copy the winx
interface to succeed either. maybe this is an indication of how serious they are
about this being a viable replacement. if they won't even try to offer a desktop
that someone has tried to design rather than just copy... i don't think we can
expect much from this product.

maybe this is part of the new alliance. offer a broken dream that runs on a
regular pc (keep MS in biz, and looking artificially better than a linux based
solution), and then bring out the real, working product when run in/on
solaris/sun spec hardware.

arg. otherwise sun just doesn't seem serious enough to exist anymore. welcome to
the new ip litigator on the block.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: eamacnaghten on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:33 AM EDT
I have recently spoken to a SUN salesman regarding JDS regarding SUN's stratergy
with it.

As far as I recall, they are not too interested in pushing either Linux or
Open(Free) Source with it. It certainly does not work under the "Open
Source" model, and he implied that as soon as they get it working under
Solaris then the Linux edition will become unimportant.

It is not meant to be a competitor to Fedora (or even RedHat), SuSE, Mandrake,
Debian etc. It is not a Linux distro. It is (meant to be) a complete
proprietary (old sense of word) supported desktop system aimed at government
departments and corporates.

It will be interesting to see if they will continue to use Open Standards
(genuine ones, not Microsoft's definitions) in future incarnations of JDS - I am
not convinced they will.

I have never liked the direction JDS was trying to push things, and will not be
implementing it on customer's sites for fear of SUN tie ins and lack of freedom
(as in speach) permitted. I would rather use a community distribution (like
Fedora) that I have "brushed up", or if I needed a recognized
supported desktop, I would look towards RedHat's new offereing or Ximian's XD2.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:50 AM EDT
It is like they are trying to put out a bad linux OS with a confusing and
restricted licence. At least they dont advertise it as linux, but as java.

They really must want to have an poor product, as there are several
single-person developed live CDs that were made in less time and which work
quite nicely on normal hardware. Sun must have at least a few people
responsible for this pos.

And what is with the two year old kernel. Maybe this was the last time sun
looked at linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Nothing new here then
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:58 AM EDT
Sun ceased to be developer-friendly more than a decade ago.

More precisely, it was the release of Solaris 2 that took away the old 1980s
innovation playground, and induced developers (well, me at least) to have a look
at this new Linux thingey,
that came with a full GNU toolkit nicely bundled.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Galik on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 05:15 AM EDT
More food for the theory that the underlaying software itself has become
unimportant for the Suns and Redmonds of the world. They are making sure they
completely lock up the value they add on top of the software. The new 'platform'
is the 'IP platform'. People can have the software for free but they have to pay
for using things like Document Formats, Video Codecs, File Systems and anything
else they can lay their grubby little patents on.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: TobiasBXL on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 05:15 AM EDT
Sun hasn't gone over to the dark side.

Consider that Sun is contributing the second most important element to desktop
Linux under an Open Source license: OpenOffice.org.

Without OpenOffice.org the lookout for Linux on the desktop would be pretty
bleak.

And regarding the license someone writes about but none of us has seen a tiny
fragment of, I can only say if this is the way Sun thinks it can make money then
let them try. I don't have to remind you that SuSE started out with yast in a
similar fashion. After all, Sun can license only the parts they have written
themselves and that is their right. We have to respect that. It's not as if Sun
steals something out of GPL country.

So calm down. The text PJ has quoted is ashaming. It's FUD basically since it
doesn't contain one single example but just ranting. Do we want to sound like
that?

regards,
Tobias

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 05:16 AM EDT
Another useless review.

The reviewer complains about the license but fails to give real examples from
the license agreement to point out WHY it is so bad.

Vague talk like "it tells you what you can't do" tells me nothing
about what it is that I can't do.

If this was posted here on groklaw to complain about the license, then you'd do
well to actually point to the license as well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dark and Derisible
Authored by: rjamestaylor on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 06:27 AM EDT
DERISIBLE SUN

I don't want to spend the rest of my life
Looking at the EULA of Sun's latest slight
I don't want to spend the rest of my days
Keeping out of trouble like their lawyers say
I don't want to spend my time in hell
Looking at the walls of a prison cell
I don't ever want to play the part
Of a statistic on a Sun sales chart

We have to flee the derisible Sun
It takes its heat from everyone
We have to flee the derisible Sun
That takes our hope when the whole day's done

It's dark all day and it glows all night
Mirrors and smoke and a burned out light
Sun's JDS is just GNU/Linux
Mixed with some bogus crap that Sun threw in

We have to flee the derisible Sun
It takes its heat from everyone
We have to flee the derisible Sun
That takes our hope when the whole day's done

And they're only going to change this place
By cheating everybody in the human race
They would kill me for a cigarette
But I don't even wanna die just yet

We have to flee the derisible Sun
It takes its heat from everyone
We have to flee the derisible Sun
That takes our hope when the whole day's done

---
SCO delenda est! Salt their fields!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 06:31 AM EDT
The review referred to is just another ill informed bit of Sun bashing. It's
quite amusing for someone who actually uses Linux (and NetBSD) for real work to
see the behaviour of the Linux fanboy crowd. Linux has got to the point where
it's no longer just an operating system, it's a lifestyle (man). Ten or fifteen
years ago, the Linux fanboys would have been arguing over whether a Ferrari
could outrun a Lamborghini, or whether Metallica were more hardcore than
Megadeth.

Now the same kind of self righteous, elitist idiots are frothing at the mouth
over perceived enemies of "their" operating system. MicroSoft has
become too obvious a target, SCO too comical, so now its Suns turn. This ignores
the fact that Sun helped make Unix a respected name in the computer world (at a
time when Lisp machines were supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced
bread). Sun defies their critics by spending unusually large amounts on reaseach
and development. While the stock market analysts argue for cuts in the R&D
budget, Sun realises that R&D is their lifeblood.

As for free software, Sun funded open source software long before it was
fashionable. Tcl/Tk, NFS, Java, XView (remember when olvwm was the default on
Slackware?) for example. Nowadays a lot Suns developers are quietly documenting,
bugfixing, translating and polishing the GNOME desktop and its underlying
libaries. Not exactly headline making stuff, but the leaps and bounds the GNOME
has made in recent times are down to Suns more professional impetus.

So before you criticise Sun, try to find out what the company is really about -
an attempt to blend the hacker ethos with professionalism, something that stems
from its origins as a firm of Berkeley Unix hackers. They may be slipping into
irrelevance in the RISC workstation market, but their high end servers are
massively parallel machines that Linux cannot effectively perform on, and Intel
haven't the technology to compete with. Meanwhile, Solaris is still a better
enterprise level operating system than Linux for financial and scientific
applications due to its true scalability. The usual fanboy argument of
"using loads of PeeCees running Linux rather than one big Sun box",
are bogus - try writing a distributed application that isn't many times more
complex than a single process running on a serious server.

Chris

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 06:33 AM EDT
maybe it's a blessing that they don't label it as Linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Oh you younguns
Authored by: Arker on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 06:55 AM EDT

I can't help but laugh every time I read a post like that. Come on. Sun hasn't gone over to the dark side.

They have never been anything else.

Sun practically invented the dark side. They were the worlds premiere big evil proprietary software company when MicroSoft was in diapers.

They hate MicroSoft because MicroSoft has eclipsed them. They have and may well continue to support FOSS on occasion, as a tactical bludgeon against MicroSoft or another competitor, but don't you ever believe for a minute that any other motivation lies behind such acts.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 06:59 AM EDT
You know, before you say anything bad about Sun, be sure to think of something
good to say. Like this, they are showing that you can use properity software
with GNU/Linux. Guess it isn't so viral after all. Who knew?!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 07:46 AM EDT
Is it deceptice enough to be worth filing a complaint with the FTC or your local
state attorney general?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Slightly OT: missing "features"
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 07:48 AM EDT
So I gather in addition to missing "Java" in JDS2, they also left out
the freedom
in their free software. In what ways does it benefit the marketplace to have
another, and less compatible "proprietary" desktop that tries to
appears
"windows-like"? IBM tried to have a proprietary
"office-like" clone,
smartoffice, and that didn't go anywhere. I believe Open Office (and GNU/
Linux in general, Mozilla, etc) have succeedded at all not for being similar
enough, not for "lower cost", but rather for the freedom they offered,
which is
one place they differ from competitive offerings. Successful products are not
those that (try to) emulate other products, but that offer something
intrinsincly valuble and unique on their own. It does not seem to me JDS2
does this.



[ Reply to This | # ]

Windows users will just love it.
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 08:05 AM EDT
I am sure MS Windows users will just love the license -
the more restrictive the better.

I have a few questions however. One question would be
whether you will be required to pay the license fee again
if you move it to another machine. Another is whether a
site license will be required/possible under which you
will have to pay Sun a licence per PC even if the other
PCs run Windows. If the answer to any of these is no, then
Windows users might be disappointed.

What about a license management scheme in which BSA raids
your office at regular intervals to help you keep your
licenses up to date? Without this help to stay legal, I
fear many Windows users will not see the benefit of
switching over to JDS.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT - Software Patents in EU
Authored by: blacklight on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 08:05 AM EDT
I understand that the Council of Ministers has approved software patents in EU.
Surely, this is worth a groklaw article, even a short one.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun's way of killing Linux?
Authored by: linonut on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 08:38 AM EDT
It's as if Sun wanted to make a Linux so bad that it would
make people think Linux is crap.

With friends like Sun, who needs enemas?

Sun is seriously schizoid.


---
I use Linux. So sue me.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun over to the dark side.
Authored by: rsmith on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 08:50 AM EDT
Sun has always had an ambivalent attitude towards FOSS. After the recent
settlement with MS, the people within sun who are friendly to FOSS seem to have
lost out.

We're seeing the usual stupidity of evil at work here. This stuff is out of date
at launch. Why base a product on such ancient software as kernel 2.4.19 (almost
two years old), Gnome 2.0 (almost two years old) and Mozilla 1.4 (almost a year
old)?

Combined with the license nastiness, IMHO this falls in the "don't touch
with a 10 ft pole" department.

---
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

[ Reply to This | # ]

JDS 1: Binary Licence
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 09:13 AM EDT
Here's Sun's licence for JDS 1. Please not that the JDS 1 CDs also contain a
copy of the GPL and the remark that the major part of the software is under the
GPL!

Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Binary Code License Agreement

READ THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND ANY PROVIDED SUPPLEMENTAL LICENSE TERMS
(COLLECTIVELY "AGREEMENT") CAREFULLY BEFORE OPENING THE SOFTWARE MEDIA
PACKAGE. BY OPENING THE SOFTWARE MEDIA PACKAGE, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS
AGREEMENT. IF YOU ARE ACCESSING THE SOFTWARE ELECTRONICALLY, INDICATE YOUR
ACCEPTANCE OF THESE TERMS BY SELECTING THE "ACCEPT" BUTTON AT THE END
OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO ALL THESE TERMS, PROMPTLY RETURN THE
UNUSED SOFTWARE TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A REFUND OR, IF THE SOFTWARE IS
ACCESSED ELECTRONICALLY, SELECT THE "DECLINE" BUTTON AT THE END OF
THIS AGREEMENT.

1. LICENSE TO USE. Sun grants you a non-exclusive and non-transferable license
for the internal use only of the accompanying software and documentation and any
error corrections provided by Sun (collectively "Software"), by the
number of users and the class of computer hardware for which the corresponding
fee has been paid.

2. RESTRICTIONS Software is confidential and copyrighted. Title to Software
and all associated intellectual property rights is retained by Sun and/or its
licensors. Except as specifically authorized in any Supplemental License Terms,
you may not make copies of Software, other than a single copy of Software for
archival purposes. Unless enforcement is prohibited by applicable law, you may
not modify, decompile, reverse engineer Software. Software is not designed or
licensed for use in on-line control of aircraft, air traffic, aircraft
navigation or aircraft communications; or in the design, construction, operation
or maintenance of any nuclear facility. You warrant that you will not use
Software for these purposes. You may not publish or provide the results of any
benchmark or comparison tests run on Software to any third party without the
prior written consent of Sun. No right, title or interest in or to any
trademark, service mark, logo or trade name of Sun or its licensors is granted
under this Agreement.

3. LIMITED WARRANTY. Sun warrants to you that for a period of ninety (90) days
from the date of purchase, as evidenced by a copy of the receipt, the media on
which Software is furnished (if any) will be free of defects in materials and
workmanship under normal use. Except for the foregoing, Software is provided
"AS IS". Your exclusive remedy and Sun's entire liability under this
limited warranty will be at Sun's option to replace Software media or refund the
fee paid for Software.

4. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY. UNLESS SPECIFIED IN THIS AGREEMENT, ALL EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED CONDITIONS, REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR
NON-INFRINGEMENT, ARE DISCLAIMED, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT THESE DISCLAIMERS
ARE HELD TO BE LEGALLY INVALID.

5. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED BY LAW, IN NO EVENT
WILL SUN OR ITS LICENSORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOST REVENUE, PROFIT OR DATA, OR FOR
SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, HOWEVER CAUSED
REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THE USE OF
OR INABILITY TO USE SOFTWARE, EVEN IF SUN HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES. In no event will Sun's liability to you, whether in contract,
tort (including negligence), or otherwise, exceed the amount paid by you for
Software under this Agreement. The foregoing limitations will apply even if the
above stated warranty fails of its essential purpose.

6. Termination. This Agreement is effective until terminated. You may
terminate this Agreement at any time by destroying all copies of Software. This
Agreement will terminate immediately without notice from Sun if you fail to
comply with any provision of this Agreement. Upon Termination, you must destroy
all copies of Software.

7. Export Regulations. All Software and technical data delivered under this
Agreement are subject to US export control laws and may be subject to export or
import regulations in other countries. You agree to comply strictly with all
such laws and regulations and acknowledge that you have the responsibility to
obtain such licenses to export, re-export, or import as may be required after
delivery to you.

8. U.S. Government Restricted Rights. Use, duplication, or disclosure by the
U.S. Government is subject to restrictions set forth in this Agreement and as
provided in DFARS 227.7202-1 (a) and 227.7202-3(a) (1995), DFARS 252.227-7013
(c)(1)(ii)(Oct 1988), FAR 12.212 (a) (1995), FAR 52.227-19 (June 1987), or FAR
52.227-14(ALT III) (June 1987), as applicable.

9. Governing Law. Any action related to this Agreement will be governed by
California law and controlling U.S. federal law. No choice of law rules of any
jurisdiction will apply.

10. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be
unenforceable, this Agreement will remain in effect with the provision omitted,
unless omission would frustrate the intent of the parties, in which case this
Agreement will immediately terminate.

11. Integration. This Agreement is the entire agreement between you and Sun
relating to its subject matter. It supersedes all prior or contemporaneous oral
or written communications, proposals, representations and warranties and
prevails over any conflicting or additional terms of any quote, order,
acknowledgment, or other communication between the parties relating to its
subject matter during the term of this Agreement. No modification of this
Agreement will be binding, unless in writing and signed by an authorized
representative of each party.

For inquiries please contact: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 4150 Network Circle, Santa
Clara, California 95054

Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Supplemental License Terms for
Sun Java Desktop System, 2003


These terms and conditions ("Supplemental License Terms") for the
Software are supplementary to, and are made part of this Agreement. Capitalized
terms not defined herein will have the meanings ascribed to them in the Binary
Code License Agreement. These terms will supersede any inconsistent or
conflicting terms in the Binary Code License Agreement. Section 1
("License to Use") and Section 6 ("Termination") of the
Binary Code License Agreement shall not apply to the Software described in these
Supplemental License Terms, unless expressly provided below.

1.0 DEFINITIONS

1.1 "Affiliated Company" means any entity: (a) which is owned 50% or
more by you; or (b) over which you exercise management control; or (c) which is
under common control with you; or (d) which owns 50% or more of your Company.

1.2 "Company" means your entire organization and as further specified
in the Proof of License.

1.3 "Component Product" means those components of the Software that
are offered separately in Sun's standard product lists.

1.4 "Desktop" means a computer desktop through which You can load and
use the Software.

1.5 "Desktop Base Count" means the number of Your Desktops authorized
to load and use the Software.

1.6 "Desktop Base Fee" means the annual fee per Desktop owed in
accordance with this Agreement, the Proof of License, and, for subsequent terms,
Sun's then-current price lists.

1.7 "Employees" means all full-time employees of Company, unless
otherwise specified in your Proof of License..

1.8 "Employee Base Count" means the number of your Employees.

1.9 "Employee Base Fee" means the annual fee per Employee owed in
accordance with this Agreement, the Proof of License, and, for subsequent terms,
Sun's then-current price lists.

1.10 "Proof of License" means the collective set of documents
authorized by Sun evidencing your payment of the fees under this Agreement,
including without limitation the Sun order confirmation, receipt, or right to
use certificate.

1.11 "Software" as referred to in these Supplemental License Terms,
shall refer to the accompanying software, documentation and error corrections,
if any, provided by Sun. Software, as licensed under Section 2.1 and 2.3 of
these Supplemental License Terms must be expressly provided for in the Proof of
License.

1.12 "You" and "Your" (whether capitalized or not) shall
mean you, or if you are purchasing as an employee of a company, your Company
and/or Affiliated Company as specified in your Proof of License.

2.0 LICENSE GRANT

2.1 License. Under the terms of your Proof of License, and subject to any
additional terms contained therein, Sun grants you a non-exclusive,
non-transferable, limited license for your internal use of the Software
deployed on computer systems owned or leased by you and on your premises. The
registration process for the Software is provided in the installation guide. The
foregoing license grant does not alter any rights you may have under other
licenses that may govern some components of the Software, including your rights
under the open source licenses found in the Software's source code or in the
THIRDPARTYLICENSESREADME file.

2.2 License to Evaluate. Except as licensed under the terms of your Proof of
License, Sun grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty-free and
limited license to use Software internally for evaluation purposes only, for a
period of ninety (90) days following delivery of the Software. No license is
granted hereunder for any other purpose, including any commercial or production
use of the Software. In relation to Software licensed under this Section 2.2,
Sun is under no obligation to provide you with support, updates, error
corrections or any other service. Sections 4.0 and 5.0 of the Supplemental
License Terms will not apply to Software being licensed under this Section 2.2.

2.3 License to Distribute Redistributables. Subject to your Proof of License,
any additional terms contained therein, and the terms of this Agreement, Sun
grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to reproduce and
distribute in binary form, those files identified as redistributable in the
documentation for the Software ("Redistributables"), provided that:
(i) you distribute the Redistributables and related proprietary notices complete
and unmodified, and only bundled as part of your programs, (ii) you do not
distribute additional software intended to supersede any component(s) of the
Redistributables (unless otherwise specified in the documentation), (iii) the
Redistributables are licensed in a manner that protects Sun's interests at least
as well as this Agreement, and (iv) you will defend, indemnify and hold harmless
Sun and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities,
settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in
connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises from
the use or distribution of all software contained in your distribution.

2.4 Additional Restrictions. You agree that, (i) if your Proof of License
restricts use of Software or Component Product(s) to a number of designated
Desktops, you will not deploy the Software on more than that number of
designated Desktops, (ii) you may copy and use (but not modify) the header files
and class libraries solely to create and distribute programs to interface with
Software's APIs and only as expressly provided in the Software's documentation,
(iii) unless otherwise specified, if Component Products are delivered with
embedded or bundled software that enables functionality of the Component
Product, you may not use such software on a stand-alone basis or use any portion
of such software to interoperate with any program(s) other than the Software,
(iv) Software may contain source code that is provided solely for reference
purposes pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, (v) some portions of Software
are provided with notices and/or open source or other licenses from other
parties which govern the use of those portions, (vi) you may not publish or
provide the results of any benchmark or comparison tests run on Software to any
third party without the prior written consent of Sun, (vii) use of encryption
technology contained within the Software is subject to all applicable
governmental regulations of the United States of America and the country where
the Software is deployed, (viii) you may not assign or otherwise transfer, by
operation of law or otherwise, any of your rights or obligations under this
Agreement without Sun's prior written consent, (ix) you may not sell, rent, loan
or otherwise encumber Software, and (x) for the avoidance of doubt, the
disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provisions in this Agreement
shall apply to all Software in this distribution.

3.0 TERM AND TERMINATION. The term of this Agreement shall be for one (1)
year, and shall automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms unless
either party provides written notice to the other of its intention not to renew
at least ninety (90) days prior to the commencement of the next term. You will
remain obligated for all fees through the date of termination. Either party may
terminate this Agreement if the other party materially breaches this Agreement
and fails to remedy that breach within thirty (30) days of receipt of written
notice of material breach from the non-breaching party. Sun may terminate this
Agreement immediately if (i) you fail to pay an invoice when due, or (ii) any
Software becomes, or in Sun's reasonable opinion is likely to become, the
subject of a claim of infringement or misappropriation of any intellectual
property right. Upon termination for breach or infringement, you will cease all
use of the Software, delete all copies of all Software, and if requested by Sun,
certify the destruction of all Software, and Sun shall not have any further
obligations under this Agreement.

4.0 SUBSCRIPTION SUPPORT. Upon payment of fees when due under Sections 5.1
and 5.2 and subject to the registration requirement set forth in Section 2.1 of
these Supplemental License Terms, you will be eligible to receive limited
duration credits for services in accordance with the respective program rules
provided at http://www.sun.com/service/servicelist/, the terms of which are
incorporated herein, which may include Sun Standard Software Support, Sun
Professional Services, Sun Services Training Credits, and Installation Services.
If specified in the Proof of License, you will be eligible for Sun Premium
Software Support instead of Sun Standard Software Support. All services offered
may be subcontracted or assigned by Sun and are subject to Sun's then-current
end of service life policies. You must schedule the services within the time
frames provided in the program rules incorporated by reference above. Such
services must be received by you within the subscription year. Any unused
credits for any subscription year will expire at the end of that subscription
year.

5.0 FEES.

5.1 First Year Fee. Upon commencement of this Agreement, and in accordance
with your Proof of License, a non-refundable, non-contingent base fee for the
first year of an amount equal to either: (i) the Employee Base Count multiplied
by the Employee Base Fee; or (ii) the Desktop Base Count multiplied by the
Desktop Base Fee, shall be due prior to any obligations being incurred by Sun
and prior to your exercise of any rights granted under Sections 2.1 and 4.0 of
these Supplemental License Terms.

5.2 Subsequent Annual Fees. Upon each anniversary of this Agreement, and in
accordance with your Proof of License, you will provide payment of an annual
base fee of an amount equal to either: (i) the Employee Base Count, as assessed
on the anniversary date, multiplied by the Employee Base Fee as determined by
Sun's then-current price lists; or (ii) the Desktop Base Count, as assessed on
the anniversary date, multiplied by the Desktop Base Fee as determined by Sun's
then-current price lists. Your Employee Base Fee and your Desktop Base Fee will
not increase by more than an average of five percent (5%) compounded annually,
as averaged over the product lifetime, and as calculated from Sun's standard
price lists excluding any promotional programs or discounts.

6.0 REPORTING AND AUDIT. During the term of this Agreement and for five (5)
years following termination of this Agreement, Sun shall have a right to audit
your facilities and records from time to time in order to verify your compliance
with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any such audit shall only take
place during your normal business hours and upon no less than ten (10) days
prior written notice from Sun. Sun shall conduct no more than one such audit in
any twelve-month period except for the express purpose of assuring compliance in
such cases where non-compliance has been established in a prior audit. Sun will
give written notice of any non-compliance, and if a payment deficiency exists,
then you shall have fifteen (15) days from the date of such notice to make
payment to Sun for any payment deficiency. The amount of the payment deficiency
will be determined by multiplying either: (i) the number of under-reported
Employees by the Employee Base Fee; or (ii) the number of under-reported
Desktops by the Desktop Base Fee depending upon the payment model specified in
your Proof of License. If Sun determines that the underreported number of
Employees or Desktops exceeds five percent (5%) of the represented number of
Employees or Desktops, as applicable, under your Proof of License, then in
addition to recovering any deficiency, Sun may recover from you: (i) the costs
of the audit; and (ii) interest charges for the payment deficiency at the lesser
of 1.5% per month or the highest rate allowable by law.

7.0 JAVA TECHNOLOGY. The following terms apply to all Java technology
components contained in the Software ("Java Technology"), whether such
technology is embedded in a Sun product or feature, or as contained in the Java
2 Standard Edition software product.

7.1. Java Technology Restrictions. You may not modify the Java Platform
Interface ("JPI", identified as classes contained within the
"java" package or any subpackages of the "java" package), by
creating additional classes within the JPI or otherwise causing the addition to
or modification of the classes in the JPI. In the event that you create an
additional class and associated API(s) which (i) extends the functionality of
the Java platform, and (ii) is exposed to third party software developers for
the purpose of developing additional software which invokes such additional
API(s), you must promptly broadly publish an accurate specification for such API
for free use by all developers. You may not create, or authorize your licensees
to create, additional classes, interfaces, or subpackages that are in any way
identified as "java", "javax", "sun" or similar
convention as specified by Sun in any naming convention designation.

7.2 Software Updates from Sun. You acknowledge that at your request or consent
optional features of the Software may download, install, and execute applets,
applications, software extensions, and updated versions of the Software from Sun
("Software Updates"), which may require you to accept updated terms
and conditions for installation. If additional terms and conditions are not
presented on installation, the Software Updates will be considered part of the
Software and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement.
7.3 Software from Sources Other than Sun. You acknowledge that, by your use of
optional features of the Software and/or by requesting services that require use
of the optional features of the Software, the Software may automatically
download, install, and execute software applications from sources other than Sun
("Other Software"). Sun makes no representations of a relationship of
any kind to licensors of Other Software. TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED BY LAW, IN
NO EVENT WILL SUN OR ITS LICENSORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOST REVENUE, PROFIT OR
DATA, OR FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES,
HOWEVER CAUSED REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED
TO THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE OTHER SOFTWARE, EVEN IF SUN HAS BEEN ADVISED
OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

8.0 limitation of liability. The following sentence shall replace the second
sentence of Section 5 "Limitation of Liability" in the Binary Code
License portion of this Agreement: "In no event will Sun's liability to
you, whether in contract, tort (including negligence), or otherwise, exceed the
annual fees last paid by you for the Software under this Agreement.

9.0 Trademarks and Logos. You acknowledge and agree as between you and Sun
that Sun owns the SUN, SOLARIS, JAVA, SUN ONE, trademarks and related
trademarks, service marks, logos, trade dress and other brand designations
("Sun Marks"), and you agree to comply with the Sun Trademark and Logo
Usage Requirements currently located at http://www.sun.com/policies/trademarks.
You agree not to: (a) challenge Sun's ownership or use of Sun Marks; (b) attempt
to register any Sun Marks or any mark or logo substantially similar thereto; (c)
remove, alter or add to any Sun Mark; (d) co-brand or co-logo your products with
any Sun Marks; or (e) incorporate any Sun Marks into your trademarks, product
names, service marks, company names, domain names or any other similar
designations. Any use you make of the Sun Marks inures to Sun's benefit.

10.0 STAROFFICE AND STARSUITE FONT SOFTWARE. StarOffice and StarSuite contain
font software which generates typeface designs ("Font Software"). You
may not separate the Font Software from the Software. You may not alter Font
Software for the purpose of adding any functionality which such Font Software
did not have when delivered to you as part of the Software. You may not embed
Font Software into a document which is distributed as a commercial product in
exchange for a fee or other consideration (For example, end-users shall not
embed Font Software into an electronic book that is offered to the public for a
fee).

11.0 INDEMNITY LIMITATION. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute an
indemnity obligation from Sun, however to the extent you have a separate
agreement(s) with Sun providing for indemnification from third party
intellectual property claims in connection with this Software, notwithstanding
anything in such agreements(s) Sun's indemnity obligations to you for the
Software shall not exceed the aggregate sum of two million dollars (US
$2,000,000).

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 09:36 AM EDT
In light of this I would like to sincerely thank the rest of the foss comunity
for keeping their morals, even great os vendors like redhat,suse, mandrake
deserve a handclapping. We need to start supporting them economically (either
through donations or/and paying for distros or/and contributing by development
effort) for too long has people touted the allmost zero cost advantage that
linux has that now more frequently I find myself defending why I give money to
foss companies if 'I can download it for free' it is free as in speach and I
wish everybody wouldnt use free so liberally in the comunity. Opensource is like
a relationship: give and recieve...

ciau

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: mdchaney on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 09:45 AM EDT
Um, no, Sun was never over on this side....

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My Desk"
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 10:41 AM EDT
Two things: First, JDS is just plain junk. Like the reviewer, I couldn't get it
to
install on three modern machines and one p3 650. Support stinks and help
on their online forums is useless. Strip away the Sun hype over JDS you and
simply have a piss poor linux distro that wouldn't be worth a second
look

I sent PJ the licenses from JDS1 that I got. Perhaps she'll post them online.
They're nasty.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why all the Sun bashing?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 10:57 AM EDT
As far as I can tell, Sun is just trying to do what we've always said FOSS
should do, and the GPL allows it to do: make a commercial distribution of
software based on FOSS with separatable proprietary commercial parts. They
do seem to tell you which are which (as the GPL requires) and they allow
separation of theirs (also as required). Not really so bad, just proves FOSS
works even in the world of real business.

Their distribution may well not be a good one, I don't know. But it is in a
competitive market, and we'll find out by seeing how they do in competition
with the other Linux distros, Win XP et al, MacOS X and so on. Heck, if
Microsoft decided to similarly base their next Windows on a Linux core, we'd
all have fewer worms and viruses to use up internet bandwidth.

---
Jim

[ Reply to This | # ]

legal status of EULA enforceability?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 12:17 PM EDT
It would be great if Groklaw were to review the legal status of the
enforcability of such contracts, especially contracts whose terms are only
disclosed after the sale and which arguably give the user nothing in return that
ordinary copyright law doesn't grant. Can they really negate the right of first
sale ("non-transferable"), reverse-engineering, and the right of free speech
(you can't publish benchmarks or comparisons).

If a clause isn't enforceable,
it really seems to me that a company should be liable for trying to frighten
users by claiming it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What does the license bother us?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 01:07 PM EDT
I have problems to understand why we should bother about the license? Anyone is
free to accept or refuse it. In practice, private users will never be interested
in Sun's Linux. Corporate users, however, have different needs. When buying some
thousand licenses, you'll surely have to know what you buy. But those people
should consult a lawyer anyways.

IMO we should not care for things, that are unrelated to the development and use
of freely distributable versions of Linux. You don't like the license of Red Hat
Linux? Use Fedora, it's GPL'ed. You don't want Sun's Linux? Have a look at
Debian. We only have problems, if the freedom of choice could be restricted.

Jochen Wiedmann

[ Reply to This | # ]

I Smell a FUD Campaign
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 02:06 PM EDT
First, there was an article bashing Sun's JDS, where the author didn't even take
the trouble to actually get it installed.

Now we have an article bashing Sun's license, using lots of vague, and
ominous-sounding language, but few facts.

Then this is followed by a flood of posts agreeing that Sun is the spawn of the
devil.

Everyone seems to have conveniently forgotten the contributions that Sun has
made to Open Source, including Sun's contributions to Mozilla and Gnome, not to
mention OpenOffice.

I find it interesting that everyone dumps on Sun, while praising Apple, despite
the fact that OS/X, and other Apple technology, is much more proprietary,
secret, and locked in, than Sun's Solaris, Java, JDS, and so on. Is it because
Apple is not a threat to Microsoft (and is a potential partner in deflecting
Open Source) while Sun is definitely Microsoft's enemy? Is Microsoft concerned
about the possible success of JDS, especially considering the millions of copies
that Sun is selling in China?

On the other hand, I note that Sun's JDS is Gnome-based, and the only other
distribution that gets attacked like this is the Gnome-based Red Hat. Does
Trolltech engage in astroturf, like JBoss was recently caught doing? Who knows?

All I can say is that I become very suspicious, and doubtful, when I see a
mostly-devoid-of-facts smear campaign like this.

[ Reply to This | # ]

GPL opinions, Sun's license, and PJ
Authored by: AMc on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 03:56 PM EDT
I respect your comments Marius, however I think you have jumped a bit quickly
into this. Sun's license is fairly draconian, and you'll be able to see for
yourself soon. The license for the JDS software and it's documentation are
found on page 1 of the install guide. Anonymous, you might want to read the
fine print for yourself as well. Note: I'm going to ramble a bit explaining
how I found the license, so anyone can locate the documents I found and verify
this for themselves.

The first location an average user will look for a license will be the install
guide or manual. Or at least at the university I work at this is the case, your
mileage may vary. Bearing this in mind, I dug out manuals for several over the
counter distros from Redhat, Mandrake, Suse, and even SCO. In each case, a
paper copy of the license is included in the manual, or as a supplemental page.
All, including OpenLinux, cite portions of software as being licensed under the
GPL. A quick look at the JDS 2 CD that Sun offered my campus to license....has
no written documentation. Not even the license addendums that the article from
Linux.com references.

Since there is no paper license, the next place to look is the Sun Documentation
CD. On Solaris, these are usually pretty good, with each point release
including updated entrys. In the documents list is the JDS Release 2
Installation Guide. This document can be located through the docs.sun.com
repository at the following URL:

http://docs.sun.com/db/doc/817-5178/6mkldqpk1?a=view

**********************************************************
Before going further, I need to state that the license agreement is very
draconian. By it's terms a user cannot copy, distribute, recompile, or
otherwise reproduce the documentation or the program without Sun's permission.
I feel that the case can be argued that an objective reporting of the contents
of this license with limited quotations falls within the fair use realm. I am
not a lawyer however, and if PJ feels the need she may censor any or all parts
of the following post.
**********************************************************

The document that I find is cited as follows:

Java Desktop System Release 2 Installation Guide
Part No: 817-5178-10
Sun Microsystems, Inc. 4150 Network Circle Santa Clara, CA 95054 U.S.A.

©2004 Sun Microsystems

The first paragraph states the "product or document" is copyrighted
and distributed under licenses that limit its "use, copying, distribution,
and decompilation." Reproduction is not permitted, in any format, without
written approval from "Sun and its licensors, if any." Any third
party software are "copyrighted and licensed" from Sun suppliers, to
include the font technologies.

The second paragraph states that parts of the product may be derived from
Berkley BSD and "licensed from the University of California." It goes
on to cite UNIX as a trademark, notably licensed exclusively through X/Open
Company.

The third paragraph recognizes all Sun trademarks, registered trademarks,
service marks, licenses, and architectures belonging to Sun Microsystems Inc.

The fourth paragraph cites the inclusion of Flash player, and it's ownership,
copyrights, and trademarks belonging to Macromedia.

The fifth paragraph documents that the OPEN LOOK and Sun GUI's were developed by
Sun. It then recognizes Xerox for "researching and developing the concept
of visual or graphical user interfaces for the computer industry." The
license then states that Sun is a non-exclusive license holder to the Xerox GUI,
which is extended to Sun licensees who implement OPEN LOOK GUI's and comply with
Sun's licensing agreements.

The sixth paragraph is a Federal Acquisitions disclaimer.

The seventh paragraph is boilerplate disclaimers, including as-is, implied
conditions, warranty, fitness for use and non-infringement.

Following this, the license is repeated in other languages. A further check of
the documentation CD does not seem to list the quoted 'thirdpartylicensereadme'
file as an option in the menu structure, although a folder search does find the
file. The file does not appear to be available via the docs.sun.com site.

There you have it, in all it's restrictive terms. If the language is taken
explicitly, a JDS user is under a nondisclosure agreement in all but title. So
the real question here becomes is this license upfront about it's licensing
terms?

A quick review of this license shows no mention of the GPL license. Other
licenses (BSD, UNIX, and Xerox) are cited, although in each case the citations
are included as the result of a legal settlement. The closest comment that
could be taken to refer to the GPL would be the third party copyright and
license statement. On first read, this line almost seems to imply that Sun
holds the copyrights and/or licenses to reproduce the third party content under
it's own terms.

Next, lets look at the GPL license. A quick check of the faq file located
here:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html

...shows that the GPL is very specific in it's citation requirements.
Specifically:

"Whichever license you plan to use, the process involves adding two
elements to each source file of your program: a copyright notice (such as
"Copyright 1999 Linda Jones"), and a statement of copying permission,
saying that the program is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public
License (or the Lesser GPL).

You should also include a copy of the license itself somewhere in the
distribution of your program. In GNU programs the license is usually in a file
called COPYING; it should be the plain ASCII text version of the license. Use
either the text version of the GPL or the text version Lesser GPL.

The copyright notice should include the year in which you finished preparing the
release (so if you finished it in 1998 but didn't post it until 1999, use 1998).
You should add the proper year for each release: for example, "Copyright
1998, 1999 Linda Jones" if some versions were finished in 1998 and some
were finished in 1999. If several people have helped write the code, use all
their names.

If you have copied code from other programs covered by the same license, copy
their copyright notices too. Put all the copyright notices together, right near
the top of each file.

It is very important for practical reasons to include contact information for
how to reach you, perhaps in the README file, but this has nothing to do with
the legal issues of applying the license."

In the interest of time, I'll focus on the GPL citations that are not included
in the code. These are:

- a copy of the GPL license itself
- a file named 'COPYING' that gives an ASCII text version of the license
- inclusions of relevant copyrights falling under the GPL, to include owners,
dates, and contact information

Love it or hate it, the GPL is very specific about requiring the end user to
have ready access to the license information of software using it as a license.
On the face of it, Sun is not in compliance with the license. The more
troubling part of this is the fact that Sun's blanket 'third party' comment does
not inform of non-GPL license terms any more than it does GPL license terms. As
a purely hypothethical example, suppose developer XYZ releases a utility that is
licensed only to the individual machine owner, and requires the developer to
have full remote access to the machine. The end user would be none the wiser,
and one not initiated into the literary games of licensing agreements would
likely take Sun at face value that it had the right to include the software.

I don't know that I agree with PJ's wording, but as far as I can see Sun isn't
giving credit where it is due. Whether they are stealing is dependent on
whether that 3rd party line can be construed as sufficient for GPL purposes.
And that is for the FSF to decide.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Can O worms
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 04:43 PM EDT
seems you are drawing a lot of flak for this article PJ, just want to let you
know I am with you all the way.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My Desk"
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 05:00 PM EDT
Okay ever since June 03, when PJ called Sun the "toxic boyfriend", we
knew they'd be pulling something awful.
So now they do their best to make it seem like GPL code is their's, and yes,
it's deceptive.
I have a question, they must have expended more cash to do this than they can
hope to regain and they've made everyone, who still blelives them, start looking
for an out : so, how do you stop self-destructive companies?
This is so plainly a mistake that I'm tempted to recommend Haldol.
If you know another anti-psychotic that might work suggest it also.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Is there a legal reason for the old linux base?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 05:45 PM EDT
My question is;

Is Sun using an older linux/software base to try to avoid
interfering with anti linux legal stratagies thier
partners may have??

I dont know anything about the desktop envioment, or the
software in question, other than I have read they are
using an older linux release ( 2 y/o? )


I hope this is seens since it's well on the bottom of a
long list now

Wolvenar

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun and it's shareholders
Authored by: RedBarchetta on Sunday, May 23 2004 @ 05:53 PM EDT
Sun's stock has been tanking for over 2-3 years now, and I see no end in sight.

Then, to try and raise stockholder value, they release this outdated piece of junk? C'mon Sun!!!

Sun needs to wake up, and get some of those many programmers sitting on their butt to do some actual work. Having worked at Sun in the past as a contractor, I know just how complacent they tend to be. In fact, I was brought in at a high hourly rate to get a project off the ground that was stagnant for 1 whole year! The programmers had no clue in how to get the entire Java environment working (their own product, mind you). Sad, but true.

They believed that hiring a contractor at a high hourly rate to fix a problem their own (permanent) programmers created, contrary to the proper course of action: fire the incompetent programmers.

But why should they care? Most of the senior sun employees have made their cash, and are sitting back and enjoying it while letting the company stagnate. (I happened to personally know one of the CPU architects at Sun, and he lives in a $15 million dollar house in Saratoga, CA. Life is good, why make yourself work???)

I think I will be unloading my Sun stock in the next few weeks. I am hoping to get at least $5/share, but given this ridiculous news, I may just dump it and take the tax write-off.

---
Collaborative efforts synergise.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Licence Blues
Authored by: mobrien_12 on Monday, May 24 2004 @ 02:42 AM EDT
One of the reasons I made the move to FOSS was that I got completely sick of
licence agreements and reading them (and I DO read them). Fight with pages of
crazy legal lingo that seeks to restrict all sorts of my rights or go with a
straightforward, unobtrusive licence like GPL or BSD?

Hmmmmm... which do I want?

SUN's very complex licence agreement, which needs an addendum booklet, sounds
like a real turnoff to me.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: robobright on Monday, May 24 2004 @ 09:56 AM EDT
The JDS is Suse and Morphix on the Live CDROM I tried. Most everything ran, but
the selection of software was pretty sparse. Also it was very slow for the most
part. I've toyed with MandrakeMove, Suse 9 Live Demo, and Knoppix. That said
the Sun JDS was pathetically slow. The only thing that impressed me was the
Mozilla Firefox browser. I gave the CD away after half an hour of testing. I
did not even want it for a coaster.

Regards

[ Reply to This | # ]

Just Say No...
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 24 2004 @ 04:31 PM EDT

That makes it particularly easy.

As if you really NEED any more reasons to avoid Java...


[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun Java Desktop System Release 2's License: "Worst Software License Ever to Have Crossed My De
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 25 2004 @ 05:43 PM EDT
Now why is there so much knee jerk reaction to Sun Corporation's latest
offering? it almost appears to be a case of over zealous reaction by a bunch of
newbies who are energized but also unable to control their personal thoughts due
to competitive instinct. Cooler heads need to prevail; which will come with
time, but persons need to maintain a "Check yourself" attitude so
remorse over past unpleasant events can be kept to a minumum. The key point is
for everyone to remember this is unfamiliar territory for companies and perhaps
the company has discovered and angle that they find important and needs to be
addressed. Its not friendly or fair to judge intentions without a full
understanding the dynamics at hand. Personally, every entity looking to make
money off open source needs observation but the observation shouldn't become a
factor in determining how open source is implemented unless solid evidence of
misuse is apparent. Don't wait five years before crying foul! but don't cry
foul after one day or even one month! cry foul after 4 to six months! This way
the effect of knee jerk is calmed and most likely everyone will have less
remorse in the future I

[ Reply to This | # ]
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details ) 		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
Powered By GeekLog
Created this page in 0.07 seconds