java3d licensing: contact wanted for dev team or licensing

[spacewar]

I'm trying to package Java3d for Fedora Linux, in order to be able to package things that depend on it, such as 3D printing software. I have a package ready, but there's a snag because the license isn't actually the BSD license. It has the extra restriction that the software can't be used for nuclear facilities.

Tom Calloway points out:
In the past, Sun was willing to drop that clause on a case
by case basis (and way back in 1998, they promised they were
getting rid of it entirely...)

Can anyone suggest contacts on either the Java3d developer team, or in Oracle licensing, that might be able to help with this?

Thanks!
Eric

 

[Lew]

I'm trying to package Java3d for Fedora Linux, in order to be able
to package things that depend on it, such as 3D printing software.
I have a package ready, but there's a snag because the license isn't actually the BSD license.
It has the extra restriction that the software can't be used for nuclear facilities.

Why is that a problem for you? Are nuclear facilities that important a market for you?

 

[John B. Matthews]

Why is that a problem for you? Are nuclear facilities that important
a market for you?

I think this is more about Fedora license [1] compatibility [2]. I've
always assumed that Sun's license clause [3] was about liability more
than ideology. Maybe I should move the smoke detector away from the
computer.

The Java 3D license [4] says, "This is the same open-source license that
OpenJDK is now using." How does Fedora's OpenJDK package handle this?

[1] <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines>
[2] <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses>
[3] <http://openjdk.java.net/legal/binary-license-2007-08-02.html>
[4] <http://java3d.java.net/#Licenses>

 

[231c46]

The proximate cause is, as John says, a Fedora issue. A BSD license with an added clause to exclude nuclear facilities does not qualify as Open Source per the OSI's Open Source Definition, which states:

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

The license must not restrict anyone from making use of
the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example,
it may not restrict the program from being used in a business,
or from being used for genetic research.

The same requirement is part of the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG), so technically Java3D should not be included in the Debian distribution either.

In general I think it would be in everyone's best interest if Oracle removed the restriction in order to make Java3D truly Open Source. That's why I'm interested in trying to establish contact with the Java3D developers and/or the Oracle licensing people.

The Java 3D license [4] says, "This is the same open-source license that
OpenJDK is now using." How does Fedora's OpenJDK package handle this?

That statement is in error. The OpenJDK license does not include a nuclear facility exception, nor is it BSD-licensed at all. OpenJDK is covered by GPLv2.

 

[paul.cager]

I'm trying to package Java3d for Fedora Linux . . .

Can anyone suggest contacts on either the Java3d developer team, or in Oracle licensing, that might be able to help with this?

I had a similar problem with JavaCC, Debian and Sun (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=276302). The Sun employees in that link were very helpful and I'd suggest they might be a good starting point, even if they are no longer involved in licensing.

Of course Sun is now part of Oracle, so their Sun email addresses may no longer work. Hopefully their names are sufficiently uncommon so that you can trace them, providing they are still(?) Oracle employees.

 

[231c46]

Thanks! It appears that they are no longer with Oracle, but perhaps they might be able to recommend someone who is.

 

[John B. Matthews]

The Java 3D license [4] says, "This is the same open-source license
that OpenJDK is now using." How does Fedora's OpenJDK package
handle this?

That statement is in error. The OpenJDK license does not include a
nuclear facility exception, nor is it BSD-licensed at all. OpenJDK
is covered by GPLv2.[/QUOTE]

I may have quoted too little from <http://java3d.java.net/#Licenses>. It
looks like parts of Java 3D are BSD and parts are modified GPLv2; that
is what prompted my question.

"The source code for the j3d-core-utils and j3d-examples projects is
licensed under the open source Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD)
License.

"The source code for the j3d-core and vecmath projects is licensed under
the open source GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2, with the
CLASSPATH exception. This is the same open-source license that OpenJDK
is now using."

Am I reading this right?