[DebianGIS] JAI-core acceptable in non-free?
I have been trying to find out whether jai-core (java advanced
imaging) is acceptable for distribution in 'non-free'.
It's a library that is used by (among others) a large number of open
source java GIS applications.
>From the website:
The source code for the jai-core project is licensed under the Java
Research License (JRL) for non-commercial use. The JRL allows users to
download, build, and modify the source code in the jai-core project
for research use, subject to the terms of the license.
https://jai-core.dev.java.net/source/browse/jai-core/LICENSE-JRL.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup
The source for the jai-core project is also licensed for commercial
use under a new no-fee Java Distribution License (JDL). The JDL allows
commercial use of Java Advanced Imaging with or without modification,
as long as compatibility with the entire API Specification is
maintained. This includes passing the TCK tests for Java Advanced
Imaging, and retaining the javax namespace as defined by the JCP.
https://jai-core.dev.java.net/source/browse/jai-core/LICENSE-JDL.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup
I have no experience at all, but the second license 'JDL' seems quite
problematic, but I wonder if the first one (Java research license) is
acceptable for non-free.
Johan
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Torsten Werner <twerner@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi Francesco,
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Francesco P. Lovergine
> <frankie@debian.org> wrote:
>> Is there anyone that analyzed JAI license in order
>> to have a possible non-free distribution? Anyone worked in recent times about
>> that?
>
> you might want to start here:
> <https://jai-core.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=35>. The request
> to change the license is 5 years old. I haven't checked if it is
> possible to distribute it in non-free.
>
> Cheers,
> Torsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-grass-general mailing list
> Pkg-grass-general@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-general
>
Reply to: