[cdi-dev] About JSR 330.Next and CDI 2.0

Jens Schumann jens.schumann at openknowledge.de
Fri Jul 4 02:11:07 EDT 2014

Von:  Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>
Datum:  Friday 4 July 2014 00:46
An:  Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>
Cc:  Reza Rahman <reza.rahman at oracle.com>, Arun Gupta
<arungupta at redhat.com>, Badr Elhouari <badr.elhouari at gmail.com>, Adam Bien
<abien at adam-bien.com>, CDI-Dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>, Eisele Markus
<Markus at eisele.net>
Betreff:  Re: [cdi-dev] About JSR 330.Next and CDI 2.0

>In a majority of cases, not just Oracle but also other vendors from a
>legal point still live and practice a "Shrinkwrap mindset", so the only
>license that counts is the one you see when you "open the box". Or
>download artifacts from JCP or a similar place.

Well, this might be their mindset. However European IP law treats this
quite different and has a strict understanding for doing so (I avoid the
c-word here on purpose). I assume US IP law is quite similar in this
regard - especially in the area of author/copyright owner rights,
exploitation rights, etc.

I am not familiar with JCP/EC/Oracle/Sun/... internals. Nevertheless I
have been in a legal battle that covered both source code disclaimers and
"intended contractual purpose that lead to the source". Since both did not
match at some point we had to exchange arguments via lawyers. And - at no
surprise - it turned out that European/German IP law is pretty simple and
works just like Mark wrote in his mails before;).

Of course there are issues if source code is created as an result of an
specification process (say - paper was first). However it won¹t break
source code copyrights and attached licenses, particularly in the case of

Let¹s hope things can be sorted out without lawyers,

More information about the cdi-dev mailing list