RE: [higgins-dev] IP question - resent

["Duane Buss" <dbuss@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The original reply only went back to Tony instead of the whole list, resending so the information is common knowledge.

    I understand and agree with the desire to reduce IPR issues for Higgins consumers.   I was trying to determine what licensing options were desirable and permissible before looking at specific options for replacing the Jericho LGPL library.    I think there are several things which can be done to replace that lgpl library without undue pain.  

Options for removing the LGPL code from the OpenID CP include (but are not limited to:
     - Requesting the author dual license  the code.   This request has been made I have not yet heard anything back.
     - Move the form parsing entirely into the javascript, this would allow deployers to use the  any code they want to parse the form.  Trivial code change, requires slightly more configuration and might involve more work for redeployers.   The test project which is not distributed or used for deployment might still use the LGPL code initially to simplify it's testing, transitioning to something else shortly.
     -  Move to htmlcleaner (bsd style license) then use xml parser on the forms.   
      - Move to htmlparser (Common Public License Version 1.0) 
      - New code 

     I am far more worried about openid4java's provenience and IPR issues.   Their tar.gz redistributes a number of other libraries including openxri.


-Duane

>>> Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@xxxxxxxxxx> 04/11/07 4:22 PM >>>


My point being is that if we allow "required" but non distributed libraries
which have non compatible IPR with distributed libraries from Eclipse we
are going to create IPR issues with the consumers of Higgins. As I said IBM
does not support this approach.

Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122


                                                                       
             "Paul Trevithick"                                         
             <paul@socialphysi                                         
             cs.org>                                                    To
             Sent by:                  "'Higgins \(Trust Framework\)   
             higgins-dev-bounc         Project developer discussions'" 
             es@xxxxxxxxxxx            <higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>       
                                                                        cc
                                                                       
             04/11/2007 04:33                                      Subject
             PM                        RE: [higgins-dev] IP question   
                                                                       
                                                                       
             Please respond to                                         
             "Higgins \(Trust                                          
                Framework\)                                            
             Project developer                                         
               discussions"                                            
             <higgins-dev@ecli                                         
                 pse.org>                                              
                                                                       
                                                                       




Hi Duane,

For libraries that we redistribute we must request Eclipse legal approval
on
each and every library. The anecdotal evidence I've heard is that the
closer
the license is to EPL (e.g. Apache 2.0) the more likely it is to get
approval.

But I think your question here is more about libraries that we are not
redistributing, but nonetheless require. (Of course none of the core of
Higgins would do this, but, as has been discussed, some plugins might). I
wish I had a list. I know GPL is not compatible. I would have thought LGPL
was okay, though I did see Tony's post somewhat to the contrary.

-Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane Buss
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:05 PM
> To: higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [higgins-dev] IP question
>
> Where can I find documentation describing the EPL compatible licenses?
>
> Duane
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev

_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev