Re: [aspectj-users] AspectJ run-time licensing

[Andy Clement <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mike,

I've sent an email to Eclipse legal - hopefully they'll be in touch in
the next few days.

Andy

2009/10/12 McSherry, Mike <mcsherry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Andy et al.
>
>
>
> I’d very much appreciate if the project folks could get the Eclipse IP team
> to lend some guidance in clarifying the license exception terms for
> aspectjrt.jar.  We need a clear understanding of what terms from the EPL
> apply (or not) for the inclusion and redistribution of aspectjrt.jar in our
> commerical product.
>
>
>
> What can we do to initiate a response on this, and in what timeframe could
> we expect a clarification?
>
>
>
> Our developers are anxious to move forward, but we need to address this
> legal question before they are given the go-ahead.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Ramnivas Laddad [ramnivas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 1:06 PM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] AspectJ run-time licensing
>
> SpringSource dm Server has a similar situation, so you may be interested in
> the following:
> http://www.springsource.com//products/dmserver/licensingfaq
> -Ramnivas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Wim Deblauwe <wim.deblauwe@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> There is some information on the EPL on wikipedia:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_Public_License
>>
>> What i find most striking is that it is not compatible with the GPL, so as
>> I understand it, you cannot build a GPL application or library using
>> aspectJ. Can somebody confirm this?
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Wim
>>
>> 2009/10/5 Andy Clement <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> Unfortunately - I'm not a lawyer either and basically agree with
>>> Ramnivas. But I would say the AspectJ FAQ is very overdue an update
>>> (and wasn't written by a lawyer originally) - it still references the
>>> CPL when we moved to EPL many releases ago.  However, I'd say there is
>>> no intention to trick anyone here, and my interpretation is simply
>>> that you need to ship aspectjrt.jar as-is (without removing any of
>>> it).  We could maybe ask the Eclipse IP team for some guidance, but
>>> I've not had to do that before and aspectjrt.jar has been shipped with
>>> many products in the past (not just open source projects).
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>>> 2009/10/2 McSherry, Mike <mcsherry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> > Greetings,
>>> >
>>> > I'm interested in the license exception noted in the FAQ, which Jacob
>>> > Bower
>>> > also referenced.  If distributing only 'aspectjrt.jar' as part of my
>>> > product, I read it as only the warranty disclaimers being applicable.
>>> > Referring to the EPL license text, that would be solely the terms noted
>>> > in
>>> > "Section 5: NO WARRANTY"?
>>> >
>>> > Is that indeed the extent of the terms which are applicable to
>>> > distributing
>>> > ‘aspectjrt.jar’?
>>> >
>>> > I'd greatly appreciate clarification on this from the project leads,
>>> > since
>>> > I'm not a lawyer either, but I have to work with them.
>>> >
>>> > --Mike
>>> >
>>> > Jacob Bower wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I had got the impression that distribution generally wasn't going to be
>>> > an
>>> > issue.
>>> >
>>> > However, I'm trying to understand what my obligations are in terms of
>>> > for
>>> > example making the end user view the EPL?
>>> >
>>> > - Jacob
>>> >
>>> > 2009/7/13 Ramnivas Laddad <ramnivas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > <mailto:ramnivas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>>> >
>>> >     I am not a lawyer, but I do not think there are any restrictions
>>> >
>>> >     on redistributing aspectjrt.jar (or any of the the AspectJ jars).
>>> >
>>> >     For example, aspectjrt.jar is distributed with many SpringSource
>>> >
>>> >     products (open source as well as commercial).
>>> >
>>> >     -Ramnivas
>>> >
>>> >     On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Jacob Bower <jacob@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >
>>> >     <mailto:jacob@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >         Hi,
>>> >
>>> >         I'm developing a Java library which will be distributed in jar
>>> >
>>> >         form. In developing this library I have used AspectJ 1.6.5 and
>>> >
>>> >         the resulting binary will include code woven in by the ajc
>>> >
>>> >         compiler. To distribute this library I will need to distribute
>>> >
>>> >         the AspectJ run-time. Users of the library will not need to
>>> >
>>> >         use ajc to compile their code as all relevant joinpoints are
>>> >
>>> >         internal to the library.
>>> >
>>> >         In this case, what are the restrictions on distributing the
>>> >
>>> >         AspectJ run-time. Can I include the aspectj.jar (or its
>>> >
>>> >         conents) in my own jar with no notices?
>>> >
>>> >         I've consulted the AspectJ FAQ on this matter, but I am
>>> >
>>> >         unclear on how I'm supposed to preserve the warranty
>>> >
>>> >         disclaimers in the license.
>>> >
>>> >         Thanks,
>>> >
>>> >         Jacob
>>> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>
>