Home » Language IDEs » Java Development Tools (JDT) » Where to go for user license clarification
| Where to go for user license clarification [message #148785] |
Mon, 15 March 2004 20:56  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jonathan.wilcox.sbcglobal.net
The Eclipse.org Software User Agreement begins with these words:
"ECLIPSE.ORG MAKES AVAILABLE SOFTWARE, DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION AND/OR
OTHER MATERIALS FOR OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS ..."
Does this mean (a) that users cannot employ Eclipse software to build
commercial products, (b) that users cannot include Eclipse software in
derived commercial products, or (c) both of (a) and (b)?
Is there a newsgroup or email address to which this question should be
posed? If so, please let me know.
Thanks.
Jonathan Wilcox
|
|
|
| Re: Where to go for user license clarification [message #148793 is a reply to message #148785] |
Mon, 15 March 2004 23:34  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: newsserver_mails.bodden.de
Eclipse is free also for commercial use.
Eric
Jonathan Wilcox maundered in <c35591$poh$1@eclipse.org>
> The Eclipse.org Software User Agreement begins with these words:
>
> "ECLIPSE.ORG MAKES AVAILABLE SOFTWARE, DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION
> AND/OR OTHER MATERIALS FOR OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS ..."
>
> Does this mean (a) that users cannot employ Eclipse software to build
> commercial products, (b) that users cannot include Eclipse software in
> derived commercial products, or (c) both of (a) and (b)?
>
> Is there a newsgroup or email address to which this question should be
> posed? If so, please let me know.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jonathan Wilcox
--
------------------------------------------------------------ -----
Eric Bodden
ICQ UIN: 12656220
Website: http://www.bodden.de
PGP key available
|
|
|
| Re: Where to go for user license clarification [message #148810 is a reply to message #148793] |
Tue, 16 March 2004 04:44 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jonathan.wilcox.sbcglobal.net
Eric,
I appreciate receiving your view of the matter. I would appreciate even
more hearing from others, especially people associated with the sponsoring
companies who support eclipse.org. My reason for this is very simple: I'd
like to know the position taken by people and companies that have the
right to benefit (if they so wish) from the copyrights to the eclipse code.
For example, the statement
> > "ECLIPSE.ORG MAKES AVAILABLE SOFTWARE, DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION
> > AND/OR OTHER MATERIALS FOR OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS ..."
could be interpreted as not providing a license for the use of eclipse
software for 'other kinds' of projects, which would mean that this
particular license does not expressly grant the right to use the software
to build outputs which are commercial products. For technical legal
reasons mentioned below, such an express grant arguably is not needed or
even effective, but I mean to raise practical questions about what
licensees may reasonably expect or understand.
The document already quoted goes on to state,
..Content made available by Eclipse.org is provided to you under
..the terms and conditions of the Common Public License Version 1.0
..("CPL")
And the licensee rights granting clause of the CPL states,
..a) Subject to the terms of this Agreement, each Contributor hereby
..grants Recipient a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright
..license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display,
..publicly perform, distribute and sublicense the Contribution of such
..Contributor, if any, and such derivative works, in source code and
..object code form.
What the granting clause does not explicitly do is grant the right to
OPERATE the software as a program. Yes, the words "publicly perform"
might be so interpreted, but the legal history of that phrase deals with
the performance of plays and music, not with the use of software.
For example, the commercial license used by a major US software maker
includes the words "download, use, execute, and publicly perform and
display" to express the rights granted to licensees. Another major US
software maker include the words "use, reproduce, prepare derivative works
from, publicly display, publicly perform, distribute and sublicense the
Software for any purpose". The lawyer(s) who drafted the words in those
examples would not have added all those extra terms if they believed with
comfort that the phrase "publicly perform" would do the job.
Of course, lawyers like to employ extra words to be sure of the result
they intend; but the question here is whether the license grants by
eclipse.org use enough words to assure licensees that they can use, or
operate, the software.
The CPL only employs the word 'use' in clause 'b)', which grants a patent
license: but what we're dealing with here also is a copyright license.
Now, a purist would argue that the Copyright Act as the source of the
rights to which a copyright holder can grant licenses does not control the
'use' or 'operation' of copyrightable material (otherwise, it would be
necessary for a reader to get a license to read!); and by way of contrast
the patent law does control the right to 'use' or 'operate' patented
inventions. But must software users be lawyers as well (mea culpa)? Why
can't the grant language be over-inclusive, so that licensees can get an
understanding of the grantor's expectations without performing a legal
analysis?
In any event, if other licenses are available that more clearly grant the
right to use the software for commercial output, I and perhaps others
would like to know about it. And if the license I quoted in part is
REALLY meant to allow eclipse to be used to build commercial products, as
I think it is, I'd like to suggest that the license ought to state that
result in simple, clear terms.
Regards,
Jonathan Wilcox
Eric Bodden wrote:
> Eclipse is free also for commercial use.
> Eric
> Jonathan Wilcox maundered in <c35591$poh$1@eclipse.org>
> > The Eclipse.org Software User Agreement begins with these words:
> >
> > "ECLIPSE.ORG MAKES AVAILABLE SOFTWARE, DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION
> > AND/OR OTHER MATERIALS FOR OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS ..."
> >
> > Does this mean (a) that users cannot employ Eclipse software to build
> > commercial products, (b) that users cannot include Eclipse software in
> > derived commercial products, or (c) both of (a) and (b)?
> >
> > Is there a newsgroup or email address to which this question should be
> > posed? If so, please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Jonathan Wilcox
|
|
| |
| Re: Where to go for user license clarification [message #148851 is a reply to message #148785] |
Tue, 16 March 2004 13:17 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: manahan.NOSPAM.ca.ibm.com
You can try here.
http://www.eclipse.org/legal/legalfaq.html
If you still have concerns I imagine a lawyer would probably be your
best bet for legal advice.
Peter
Jonathan Wilcox wrote:
> The Eclipse.org Software User Agreement begins with these words:
>
> "ECLIPSE.ORG MAKES AVAILABLE SOFTWARE, DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION AND/OR
> OTHER MATERIALS FOR OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS ..."
>
> Does this mean (a) that users cannot employ Eclipse software to build
> commercial products, (b) that users cannot include Eclipse software in
> derived commercial products, or (c) both of (a) and (b)?
>
> Is there a newsgroup or email address to which this question should be
> posed? If so, please let me know.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jonathan Wilcox
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Where to go for user license clarification [message #149666 is a reply to message #148851] |
Thu, 18 March 2004 17:04 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jonathan.wilcox.sbcglobal.net
Peter,
Thank you for the reference. That was the right lead to get as much of an
answer as seems to be posted on the web. I have written a followup email
to opensrc@us.ibm.com in hopes of getting a specific answer.
Regards,
Jonathan
Peter Manahan wrote:
> You can try here.
> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/legalfaq.html
> If you still have concerns I imagine a lawyer would probably be your
> best bet for legal advice.
> Peter
> Jonathan Wilcox wrote:
> > The Eclipse.org Software User Agreement begins with these words:
> >
> > "ECLIPSE.ORG MAKES AVAILABLE SOFTWARE, DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION AND/OR
> > OTHER MATERIALS FOR OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS ..."
> >
> > Does this mean (a) that users cannot employ Eclipse software to build
> > commercial products, (b) that users cannot include Eclipse software in
> > derived commercial products, or (c) both of (a) and (b)?
> >
> > Is there a newsgroup or email address to which this question should be
> > posed? If so, please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Jonathan Wilcox
> >
> >
|
|
|
| Re: Where to go for user license clarification [message #149673 is a reply to message #148818] |
Thu, 18 March 2004 17:09 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jonathan.wilcox.sbcglobal.net
Eric,
Interesting thought. I don't know that product. I suspect that it
includes some part of Eclipse, which would take it outside of my question.
Anyway, thanks for the lead.
Regards,
Jonathan
Eric Bodden wrote:
> I don't know any details but you might want to ask Rationale (developers of
> CodePro Studio) for their experience.
> Eric
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Jan 13 16:14:45 GMT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03880 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
