Well, I'm pretty sure Oracle knows this by now. If they don't issue a press release (or an order, etc.) on this anytime soon, then I smell fish. It could very well be that it is part of Oracle's official strategy to trap open-source projects like Illumos/OI.
Let's wait and see if Orcl says anything within this week. Silence on their part could very well mean it's a trap. Anyhow, it's best to stay away from that code. It's biohazard as Robin said, until proven otherwise. On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Gregory Youngblood <[email protected]>wrote: > I seriously doubt this was a deliberate trojan horse release from Oracle. > For one if that were ever proven it could be a game changer in court wrt > trade secrets etc. > > More likely this was released by someone who did not have authority to > release it. > > That still doesn't eliminate the risk to oi/illumos if someone knowingly > puts code from that solaris 11 code, even flagged as cddl, in to illumos. > All it takes is for Oracle to start taking action against usage from that > drop and by then the code tree and those working with it are tainted. Once > tainted it is very hard to clean it up again. > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Robin Axelsson" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Solaris 11 source code leaked? > Date: Mon, Dec 26, 2011 3:50 pm > > > I think fears that this might be a ruse on Oracle's side to put > OI/Illumos in trouble are probably healthy to have. Probably the best > course of action is to treat the source as a piece of biohazard while > doing absolutely nothing until we see an official reaction from Oracle. > All I was trying to say on this thread was at least pretend to give them > the benefit of the doubt and put a cheesy smile on the face. > > After all it is difficult for anyone who is framed as evil or a criminal > to do good or redeem oneself. Maybe Oracle will decide to cooperate with > the OI/Illumos folks some day in the future. So it would be a shame if > too much of badmouthing, calumny and slander would put a slight pall on > such a cooperation in the future. > > On 2011-12-26 23:15, Gabriel de la Cruz wrote: > > Oracle has rights over their code and trademarks, but as well > > responsibilities. > > > > The code could only be distributed by someone who was granted clearance > to > > the code (someone with a contractual relationship with Oracle). > > > > Oracle is allowing the continuation of the circumstances that are > > distributing the code across the Internet (Many people took contact with > > them, they know that the code is out, but they are not acting against > it). > > If this would be the breach of a trade secret they would have the power > and > > duty to prevent it from spreading in the net. > > > > Code marked with Oracle's trademarks went in the public domain with CDDL > > headers. If the CDDL headers were misused, they should correct them, or > > remove the files from the public domain. No one but Oracle has the duty > to > > protect the right use of the code released under their trademarks. > > > > In my modest opinion Oracle is liable itself for the distribution of the > > code under CDDL headers, no matter what is the protocol usually followed > in > > official releases. The code is in the public domain, uses their > trademarks, > > and contains legal guidelines how to use it. Oracle has responsabilities > > over the 3 facts. > > > > My personal guess would be to put in contrast (file by file) the former > > Opensolaris code with the data that was released. If the code is marked > as > > CDDL in both, and the data has sufficient similarities, I would simply > use > > it following the CDDL norms. > > > > Maybe it could be a good idea to ask Oracle to say if they have something > > against it. I would just formulate the question so they have to respond, > > and send it to sufficient addressees. > > > > I am not an OI developer, neither a layer, I am just dropping ideas as > > others do... > > > > Please correct me if I am wrong... > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Gregory Youngblood > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> Oracle owns copyright they don't have to follow cddl if they choose not > to. > >> > >> Irrelevant if these files have cddl license stamped on them. Could have > >> been done by anyone. Until or if this is officially recognized by > Oracle as > >> an official release it is poison fruit. Anything or one that looks at > this > >> and incorporates it into any projects risks the destruction of that > >> project. Something I am sure Oracle wouldn't mind happening to illumos > or > >> openindiana. > >> > >> This is no different than someone stealing Windows code, slapping gpl > >> licenses on the code and releasing it. They were not legally authorized > to > >> put that license on that code and release it so it does not count and in > >> court it would not be recognized. Same as a locksmith making an extra > copy > >> of your housekey and giving it to someone saying tale anything you want. > >> > >> Best course of action is to ignore it, don't look at it, and especially > >> don't download it. > >> > >> Greg > >> > >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone > >> > >> ----- Reply message ----- > >> From: "Nikola M"<[email protected]> > >> To: "Discussion list for OpenIndiana"< > [email protected] > >> Subject: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Solaris 11 source code leaked? > >> Date: Mon, Dec 26, 2011 12:28 pm > >> > >> > >> Ray Arachelian wrote: > >>> On 12/26/2011 07:31 AM, Nikola M wrote: > >>>> Maybe it is truly CDDL for the parts marked like that, > >>>> besides, why would Oracle keep CDDL headers if it is not CDDL anymore? > >>>> > >>> It's a trap that smells much worse than SCO's attempt to kill Linux via > >>> lawsuit. Stay away from it. You wouldn't want OpenIndiana or illumos > >>> to be tainted by it - if they are, they'll be sued into oblivion, and > >>> they will cease to exist. > >>> > >>> If Oracle releases the source to Solaris 11 through normal channels, > >>> then, by all means, have at it. But this isn't it. > >> Well, surely Illumos will not use that code directly at first as you > said. > >> Until there are concerns such as you said. > >> > >> But nature of CDDL is that it provides protection for lawsuits aether > >> for source that in under CDDL or for so called "patents" and it extends > >> to derived work. If someone want its patents or exclusive rights it > >> should not derive its OS (Solaris11) from code under Free software > >> license that provides "open forever" clause. > >> > >> Point is, (and someone also said it) that only way Oracle can stop > >> others for using CDDL-ed work and Oracle's derived work from Opensolaris > >> is not to release it for some time. > >> And that is exactly what Oracle did. It did not released updates on code > >> for some time and once code is out > >> it does not matter who made it available. > >> Maybe Oracle would have legal trouble from someone if code is NOT > >> published by any mean. In this way Oracle is protected. > >> > >> Code is available, it is there, it is under CDDL because it is > >> opensolaris derived work and one can use it as every derived code that > >> came out from any such free software / open source license that has > >> requirement of publishing source code for derived work. > >> > >> Thing is, if it is not good thing for Illumos to use it, someone else > >> might use it freely and make something out of it. > >> Others concerned and frightened (majority I suppose) might not touch it > >> as a precaution but to see is as a blueprint for constructing something > >> compatible maybe, if compatibility with Oracle Solaris is needed in the > >> future. > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > > > > . > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > _______________________________________________ > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > _______________________________________________ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
