Re: [jsr-314-open] mailinglist: looking for immediate action
On 11/13/09 1:20 PM, Dan Allen wrote:
Ah. I see. That makes sense. So to revise my statement, we don't
need it
for API discussions ;)
Maybe. IANAL, but it's my understanding the JSPA has specific carve
outs for things like discussions of possibly patentable technology, or
(and I may be mistaken here) trade secrets.
Just because we've never used it doesn't mean we won't - but the JSPA
protections only apply to signatories (i.e., JCP members), so a private
list is also required for that function (if desired).
Please consult your local legal rottweilers for more information. And
since I'm not a lawyer, everything I've said above may be wrong - don't
make any business decisions based on this email. (This concludes the
legal disclaimer portion of this email.)
Jim