Sun Exec Backs GPLv3

Hyperbeth writes "Sun's chief open-source officer Simon Phipps said that existing work towards GPLv3 had been 'extraordinary and effective' and he said he is 'frankly amazed by the criticisms'. The article notes that Mr. Phipps' comments are somewhat surprising, given that the recent open-sourcing of Java went forward with GPLv2." From the article: "I am frankly amazed by the criticisms that have [been] levelled at the GPLv3 process. They seem to ignore the incredible and positive way it is evolving and just find fault with things that are already the subject of work... I would be very surprised if the final GPLv3 was not an effective tool for some of the communities Sun sustains or will initiate in the future."

He's Amazed

[jazman_777]

Because all smart people think just like he does, he's amazed at how many stupid people there really are out there.

No surprise

[J.R. Random]

The article notes that Mr. Phipps' comments are somewhat surprising, given that the recent open-sourcing of Java went forward with GPLv2

There is nothing surprising about this. GPL v3 in final, legally binding form doesn't exist yet, so of course any GPLed software released now will use GPL v2. It will only be surprising if future releases of Java don't use GPL v3 after it is finalized.

... went forward with GPLv2

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is that amazing to anyone? The GPLv3 isn't a finalized document yet so there's no reason to publish any source code under it.

Why is this a shock?

[DARKFORCE123]

Why would it be a shock that Java is not licensed under the GPLv3? GPLv2 is well understood now in the legal community, and GPLv3 is going to be examined under a fine toothed comb for a long time even after it is published. It could be a long time before you see major software from large companies published under GPLv3 if at all.

Re:Great for Sun.

[Mongoose Disciple]

It will mean something when Solaris us placed under it.

Why does this have to be the case? Why does it have to be black and white, all or nothing? Why can't open source be the right answer for some of Sun's projects and not the right answer for others? This seems perfectly sensible to me.

Re:Great for Sun.

[GigsVT]

I don't think Sun stands to gain much from destroying Linux at this point. The damage that Linux did to Sun is done, destroying it won't help matters now.

I'd believe you more if this story was about a company that really wants to destroy Linux, like Novell or MS.

Re:He's Amazed

[s20451]

Hooray for believing that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid. It's like intellectual elitism for the lazy.

No surprise at all...

[Eric Damron]

It is no surprise that Sun put Java under the GPL2 for now. Sun didn't want to wait for the GPL3 license to become final. The Novell/Microsoft deal puts a dark cloud over Mono (The Linux implementation of .Net) which is in direct competition to Java. If ever there would be a better time to free the Java code, I don't know when.

I think the entire OSS community owes Sun a big thank you.

We should now embrace Java and incorporate it into Linux. We should push away from ASP.net and move toward making Java the defacto standard for web applications and Java script the standard for dynamic web pages.

No that's not what the GPLv3 does..

[Anonymous Coward]

There is nothing anti-DRM about what the GPLv3 does, at least in that manner.

You can use GPLv3 software to impliment DRM all day and night if you feel like it. Play DRM'd music, use it on DRM'd operating systems, etc etc etc.

What is anti-DRM about the GPL is that you can't use DRM to remove the ability for people to modify software and then be able to run those modified versions.

the GPLv3 only cares about the program. It doesn't care about the hardware or any DMR'd media or anything like that.

Anyways DRM is a failed technology. I give it another 3-5 years then nobody is going to give a shit anymore, at least anybody that matters. (repeat after me children: failed business model = irrelevent)

Nobody has yet to come out with a effective DRM and it is only used to be abused by companies like Apple and Microsoft so that people have a harder time moving away from using Ipods or Windows, because your file formats that are DRM'd are locking you into a paticular hardware (ipod) or software (future versions of Office).

GPLv3 is going to be examined?!

[Anonymous Coward]

GPLv3 IS being examined.

Suns praticipating, IBM praticipating, HP is praticipating. Anybody that has any stake in Free and Open source software is praticipating. They have their lawyers all over it.

when it gets released it WILL the most well reviewed open source license in history. Maybe even the most well reviewed software license ever.

It will eliminate the need for a whole class of licenses. Licenses that desire to be 'more free' then the GPL, but want to stay GPL-compatable.
The GPLv3 + exceptions is beuatfull and it is flexible in what sort of additional restrictions it can take. It will make it more compatable with Apache licenses, Mozilla licenses, and dozens of others. It may even be CDDL compatable.

It will help standardize licenses and make them easier to deal with and have less legal questions cloading the Linux arena.

The Patent language has long been needed and it is much more liberal and easier for companies to deal with then what is already used in MPL, CDDL, or the modern Apache licenses. Much more well designed then those supposwdly 'more corporate friendly license'. The Novell-Microsoft deal highlights the need for reform in this area of the GPL, there needs to be a intellegent and standard way to deal with this stuff and GPLv3 should provide it.

Re:He's Amazed

[Knuckles]

So, Linus is stupid, now?

In questions of licensing and use of unfree software if it scratches his itch? That's at least debatable.

Re:GPLv3 is going to be examined?!

[LoveMe2Times]

If I had mod points, I'd mod you up. This is one of the very few intelligent posts about GPLv3 that I've seen. So many people are parroting the same bullshit negativity that it's refreshing to see someone point out the many positives of the new license. I'm still stunned by the furor created by this whole thing. Why do most people focus on incompatibility with GPLv2 rather than the great improvements in compatibility with most everything else? Another oft-overlooked element is the internationalization--making the license more resilient to different countries' laws. I think you are entirely correct that this will be the most reviewed license, and that alone will be a good reason to go with it: predictability and a reasonable assurance that it does what you think it does. I predict that 3 years from now, GPLv3 will have become the most used FOSS license, and that we will see a decrease in the number of different licenses in common use. I think that's a good thing.

Re:No surprise

[LurkerXXX]

Probably because that's a really really really dumb clause, when you don't know what versions will look like, or whether you will agree with them.

Re:Great for Sun.

[Mongoose Disciple]

If Sun's goal is assumed to be freedom, sure, that's true. Probably their goal is the best interest of the company and to some degree its customers. A lot of times free software will serve that, but I don't think it necessarily best serves it in all cases.

I think there's great things to be found, even for businesses in free software -- I just wish people saw it as more an option and less a religion.

Re:No surprise at all...

[illumin8]

I'm not sure why this keeps coming up, but let me feed the trolls a little bit and take this one point by point:

Didn't these folks come out swinging against Linux and OSS development long ago and far away?

Not that I'm aware of, although Linux has been a competitor to Solaris (in Sun's eyes) in the past, they didn't actively try to sabotage it, they just acted indifferently at times; although now they fully support it (All Sun hardware is certified Linux compatible, etc.).

Didn't they make some deal with Microsoft RE: OpenOffice?

Umm... No, they sued Microsoft, and won, settling for $2 billion for the dirty tricks MS played trying to embrace and extend Java. And by the way, why in the hell do people keep ripping on Sun for stupid shit like this? Sun FUCKING GAVE YOU GUYS OpenOffice, out of pure generosity and to contribute to Free FUCKING Software. I guess no good deed goes unpunished.

Weren't they somehow implicated in the SCO debacle as someone backing the lawsuit?

Again FUCK NO! Sun has licensed Unix System V from Santa Cruz Operation for several years now, as they are the proxy that licenses the original AT&T Unix code to companies like HP (HP-UX), IBM (AIX), SGI (IRIX), and Sun (Solaris). Every one of those companies pays licenses to SCO in order to legally be able to sell UNIX. Looks like everyone that runs commercial Unix funds SCO to some degree... Guess we're all guilty.

Look, man, I'm glad they've "finally seen the light" and opened up their stuff (still CDDL for most of the code though, right?) but they've done it when it was convenient and when they've got something to gain now, not because it was the right thing to do. Many thanks and all, and definitely a company to consider an ally -- but it's not like we shouldn't be watching just in case they go all "Novell" on us.

I can't believe you're such a loser that you still give Sun a hard time after all they have done for the Free Software community. Richard M. Stallman himself said that Sun had released more lines of free software source code than any other single entity (paraphrasing because I can't find the quote right now). So why can't you just forgive them and say "good job, cheers" for a change?

Disclaimer: I currently work in an environment with all HP hardware and RHEL 4. But I have worked on a lot of Sun's and we still have a lot left in our data center.

LiveScript

[Eric Damron]

You are correct. JavaScript aka LiveScript is not Java. However its syntax is very close to Java which makes it a natural.

The important thing is that Mono and .NET needs to die. Microsoft has already beat the patent war drums while pointing to Mono. Novell claims that there is no patent infringement in Mono and they're probably right but the deal they made with Microsoft will cast doubts.

Microsoft has shown over and over that they aren't interested in playing fair or giving any quarter so the OSS community along with all IT companies that have management worth their weight in salt need to come to the realization that it's time to stop trying to deal with Microsoft and simply make them irrelevant. The only way to deal with bully is to punch him square in the nose.

Microsoft wants to control standards and the Internet. We must take those away from them. Any standard that Microsoft (or any company) encumbers with patents we should avoid. If they feel that they own the .NET technology then fine let them alone have it. We should create and push real open standards. The time for being nice guys is over.

We should also put the Justis Department to bring another anti-trust suit against Microsoft. God knows they haven't changed and continue to break the law. This time we need follow through and bust them up into at least three companyies.

Re:He's Amazed

[aardvarkjoe]

The OP characterized anyone who disagrees with him as stupid. He didn't say that they were just unqualified to comment on it, or something like that.

Regardless of whether the GPLv3 is good or not, claiming that everyone who doesn't like it is stupid is ... well, stupid.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:GPLv3 is going to be examined?!

[zsau]

Not to be too negative, but I think there's been enough FUD about the GPLv3 from the likes of Torvalds and slashbots that I think it will be a long time before it's as widely accepted as GPLv2. The main reasons it will be so widely accepted are probably going to be (a) FSF has the copyright to so much and (b) GPLv2-or-later is compatible with GPLv3, but GPLv3-or-later isn't compatible with GPLv2.

This is a sad thing. The GPLv3, like almost everything RMS has done in his free software fight, will be great. RMS is strange and one of those people who always seem wrong and way out, but time and again events have shown that when it matters—there's no-one I'd rather trust on matters he talks of.

Re:Great for Sun.

[Anonymous Coward]

Its NOT about you DRMing other peoples stuff, its about other people DRMing YOUR stuff. They (TIVO for example) are taking all of our work adding a little bit of their own and then making us unable to use their work as they used our work.

Sure, YOU won't buy DRMed hardware but other people will or, more likely, they won't even know about it and without the GPL3 its possible all of our collective work will be used yet we will not be free to do anything with our work on that hardware. The GPL is about freedom, it can't stop people from making DRM, but it will stop people from taking our free works and saying "no freedom here".