Standard interfaces
Andrew J Bromage
ajb at buzzword.cc.monash.edu.au
Tue Nov 9 23:23:26 UTC 1999
G'day all.
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 12:18:29 -0500, John Cowan wrote:
[no modification allowed in the context of language bindings in standards]
> > Is Java code that binds such standard interfaces inherently unfree?
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 06:12:45PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> Such a license is not OSD-compliant.
> > Does it violate the OSD, specifically clauses 3 and 4?
> Yes. Clause 4 hints at a mechanism that can be used to make the interface
> free in this case: require that modified versions are clearly marked as such
> (in the context of standards: explicitly mention they don't conform to the
> standard).
In the case of Java, it might work to add the requirement that the
class(es) must be placed under a different package name. I think that
might give the desired effect, of discouraging modification while still
allowing it if someone downstream thought the cost was worth the hassle.
Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list