jsr358
  1. jsr358
  2. JSR358-17

"license review" process loopholes effectively grant veto power

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Reopened
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Component/s: Licensing
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Process Document review

      line numbers: JCP-2.8-21SEP2011-Redlined.pdf

      471-474 - too open-ended. Can only two members kick a license into Oracle legal? No timeframe for Oracle legal to make a decision. Also major problems with making this rest on Oracle legal. Should go through an independent mediator. The EC can always vote no, but it should be allowed a vote, otherwise this gives Oracle veto power.

      PC> Please open an issue if you want to pursue this further.

      SS> In other words, two members could call for a review and Oracle legal could simply take forever to make a decision, holding up the license until patents/copyrights revert to the public domain.

      Suggestions: review requires a majority vote (2/3?) and is done by independent legal counsel.

        Activity

        sean_sheedy created issue -
        Hide
        sean_sheedy added a comment -

        This is another issue where a choice of clearly open licenses would eliminate this problem altogether.

        Show
        sean_sheedy added a comment - This is another issue where a choice of clearly open licenses would eliminate this problem altogether.
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        We've tried and failed to document this undocumented process to the satisfaction of all concerned.

        On behalf of Steve Wolfe (IBM,) who suggested this after the September 21 Working Group meeting, I propose that we simply delete the text we added in an attempt to address this, and leave the issue unresolved (as it was when we started this JSR.)

        We can take it up again in the JSR that modifies the JSPA.

        Comments?

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - We've tried and failed to document this undocumented process to the satisfaction of all concerned. On behalf of Steve Wolfe (IBM,) who suggested this after the September 21 Working Group meeting, I propose that we simply delete the text we added in an attempt to address this, and leave the issue unresolved (as it was when we started this JSR.) We can take it up again in the JSR that modifies the JSPA. Comments?
        pcurran made changes -
        Field Original Value New Value
        Tags Need_comments
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        Agreed at the September 29 WG meeting:

        Delete the sentence "The opinion of Oracle legal shall be the
        final decision on the matter."

        Defer this issue so we can address it in the future.

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - Agreed at the September 29 WG meeting: Delete the sentence "The opinion of Oracle legal shall be the final decision on the matter." Defer this issue so we can address it in the future.
        Hide
        eduardo added a comment -

        I have deleted the sentence in question

        Show
        eduardo added a comment - I have deleted the sentence in question
        eduardo made changes -
        Status Open [ 1 ] Closed [ 6 ]
        Assignee eduardo [ eduardo ]
        Resolution Fixed [ 1 ]
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        Reopening, so we can keep this on our radar as deferred

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - Reopening, so we can keep this on our radar as deferred
        pcurran made changes -
        Resolution Fixed [ 1 ]
        Status Closed [ 6 ] Reopened [ 4 ]
        Assignee eduardo [ eduardo ]
        Tags Need_comments Defer
        pcurran made changes -
        Project jsr348 [ 12019 ] jsr358 [ 12683 ]
        Key JSR348-144 JSR358-17
        Component/s Licensing [ 14513 ]
        Component/s Process Doc [ 13866 ]
        pcurran made changes -
        Tags Defer

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            sean_sheedy
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated: