Apache tried that game for many years. Work *within* the JCP, and as a member of the EC. Apache *has* made many useful changes to the JCP and how it operates. But even with all that, it hasn't produced the JCK without an FOU clause.

At some point, enough is enough. The Apache brand name cannot continue to be associated with a sham.

Exactly. The Apache license provides freedom for developers to work with the code (pretty much) however they wish. It does not provide freedom to end-users (like copyleft/reciprocal licenses do; such as the GPL). HTC and T-Mobile are well within their rights to do something like this. It's uncool, but it is not a violation.

... Braveheart.

You struck gold on #3. If you don't work at Mozilla Corp, then you have a LONG, HARD road ahead of you to get changes in. Much less an architectural revamp to enhance security and speed.

The concept of Public Domain is actually pretty difficult to do with software. It is kind of hard to "abandon" the fact that you wrote the software which means you will always be liable for it. And you can't attach a disclaimer of warranty because that obviates public domain :-P Throw in that France won't let you disown your copyrighted works, and the whole area about PD software grows real murky. Daniel Berlin could probably be more specific, I just know the rough bits here. This question has also come up on our google-code-hosting@googlegroups.com mailing list; there should be more details there.

In any case, if you want to provide users with lots of rights, then I'd simply recommend going with the Apache License.