piątek, października 29, 2010

Oracle vs Google

Oracle pozwał Google-a za nielicencjonowane użycie Javy w Androidzie. Tymczasem Google użył bezpośrednio kodu z projektu Apache Harmony, czyli de facto Javy otwartej przez IBM-a
i udostępnionej na licencji Apache License v2.

2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.

3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed.


Licencja Apache v2 zawiera podobną jak w przypadku GPL klauzulę 'obronną', mówiącą o wygaśnięciu licencji wobec osoby pozywającej. W przypadku Oracle-a oznaczałoby to wygaśnięcie np. licencji Apache Xerces, Tomcat, Axis, Commons, CXF, Logging, Lucene, Maven, Struts, Subversion, czyli generalnie JavaEE... Prawnicy Google-a będą musieli pokombinować jak jej użyć.

0 komentarze: