John O'Hara wrote:
> On the IETF thread, the early standards were 'clean'. And there is a
> requirement to register patent interests against RFC's.
Yes *early* IETF standards were clean, but they are supposed to be the
guardians of the I in IETF, and have been delinquent by allowing IP
constrain
On the IETF thread, the early standards were 'clean'. And there is a
requirement to register patent interests against RFC's.
On 07/06/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> the IETF specifically permits (and, some may say, encourages)
> encumbered standards
On 6/7/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/7/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe we should create a set of APIs that offer genuinely open access
> to messaging systems on .NET, Java, C, C# etc. Of course if Sun wished
> to offer us the JMS API under an unencumbere
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> the IETF specifically permits (and, some may say, encourages)
> encumbered standards now. So, even implementing IETF standards
> is now dangerous.
The IETF has lost a lot of credibility as an independent standards body, and
really ought to be ashamed. But they are har
AIUI, the legality of Sun's specification licenses is considered dubious.
Not that dubious defines a stance or action, just a note.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 6/7/07, John O'Hara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> AMQP itself was designed mostly based on IETF concepts which are
>> unencumbered (like smtp, nntp, nfs).
>
> This is not true going forward as the IETF specifically permits (and,
> some may say, encourages) encumbered
On 6/7/07, John O'Hara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AMQP itself was designed mostly based on IETF concepts which are
unencumbered (like smtp, nntp, nfs).
This is not true going forward as the IETF specifically permits (and,
some may say, encourages) encumbered standards now. So, even
implementin
On 6/7/07, John O'Hara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bingo. Nicely explained.
I'm glad someone else sees the problem.
We need to keep our software 100% clean; its amazing how much IP law you
need to know to write code and give it away.
Which is why the generic form API for AMQP should be derived
On 6/7/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe we should create a set of APIs that offer genuinely open access
to messaging systems on .NET, Java, C, C# etc. Of course if Sun wished
to offer us the JMS API under an unencumbered license we could do
that, otherwise we could start from s
On 6/7/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hiram
> I guess you are referring to the license to that allows a person to
> hold a copy of the JMS spec. I wonder if violating/terminating the
> that license IP taints any work created using Ideas obtain from it.
> Since this seems to be i
On 6/7/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what is NMS?
NMS is a .NET version of JMS.
Not quite. Its a .Net Messaging API to the various MOMs available on
the .Net platform such as MSMQ, TibCo, MQSeries together with new
implementations such as for ActiveMQ and Stomp. Its just as si
On Thursday 07 June 2007 21:34, Paul Fremantle wrote:
> > Since this seems to be in the Idea category... I would have thought
> > that there would need some patents in place to enforce it.
>
> Not really. Once you agree to a contract (like that license) its
> simply contract law, AFAIK.
Nitpicking
Maybe we should create a set of APIs that offer genuinely open access
to messaging systems on .NET, Java, C, C# etc. Of course if Sun wished
to offer us the JMS API under an unencumbered license we could do
that, otherwise we could start from scratch.
This Apache Messaging API could then be freel
Bingo. Nicely explained.
I'm glad someone else sees the problem.
We need to keep our software 100% clean; its amazing how much IP law you
need to know to write code and give it away.
Which is why the generic form API for AMQP should be derived from AMQP, not
JMS.
AMQP itself was designed most
om: Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 6:35 AM
To: Hiram Chirino
Cc: general@incubator.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NMS
Hiram
> I guess you are referring to the license to that allows a person to
> hold a copy of the JMS spe
Hiram
I guess you are referring to the license to that allows a person to
hold a copy of the JMS spec. I wonder if violating/terminating the
that license IP taints any work created using Ideas obtain from it.
Since this seems to be in the Idea category... I would have thought
that there would
On 6/7/07, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hiram
I'm not sure about whether Sun has relevant patents on the JMS APIs.
Howver, there are two things that may have been violated. Firstly, the
license agreement that was "clicked-through" whenever someone looked
I guess you are referring
what is NMS?
NMS is a .NET version of JMS. In other words an API that allows .NET
clients to interact with a messaging server, especially one that
follows the same semantics as JMS (i.e. a JMS server like Apache
ActiveMQ)
what is the NMS API?
Same as above.
who specficies it?
NMS has been
Hiram
I'm not sure about whether Sun has relevant patents on the JMS APIs.
Howver, there are two things that may have been violated. Firstly, the
license agreement that was "clicked-through" whenever someone looked
at the JMS specification. Secondly the JMS copyright. Since, as far as
I can see,
On 6/7/07, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I ceased use of and destroyed my copy of the Specification years ago =)
But seriously, what kind of IP is it that is being violated?
copyright? patent? or some other kind that I'm not aware of?
what is NMS?
what is the NMS API?
who specfici
I ceased use of and destroyed my copy of the Specification years ago =)
But seriously, what kind of IP is it that is being violated?
copyright? patent? or some other kind that I'm not aware of?
Regards,
Hiram
On 6/1/07, Arnaud Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
We have been thinking abou
NMS is something that the Apache ActiveMQ team have done.
http://activemq.apache.org/nms/
Whether we are in violation of the Sun licenses is a fine question.
Paul
On 6/6/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
which standards body created NMS?
- robert
On 6/1/07, Carl Trieloff <
Unfortunately IBM licenses Sun technology under a different set of
rules, meaning that you cannot be sure that the IBM did not get an
exclusion to the license.
Paul
On 6/1/07, Colin Crist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In case you've not seen this, IBM have long since rendered the JMS API into
C++
which standards body created NMS?
- robert
On 6/1/07, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Coping incubator general and apache legal lists on this thread for
additional comments on this topic.
Carl.
John O'Hara wrote:
> Yes, IBM are I fully paid up licensee of Java technology - and can do
Coping incubator general and apache legal lists on this thread for
additional comments on this topic.
Carl.
John O'Hara wrote:
Yes, IBM are I fully paid up licensee of Java technology - and can do
whatever they like with it.
I asked permission of IBM if we could implement the XMS API some ti
In case you've not seen this, IBM have long since rendered the JMS API into
C++, C and C#
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/library/techarticles/0509_philli
ps/0509_phillips.html
Colin.
> -Original Message-
> From: Arnaud Simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 01 June 2007 1
26 matches
Mail list logo
