Sun's Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) was published this week. It's a license for.. well, that's the point: Sun isn't saying. They've offered a license, but haven't said what products it will cover.
That's a smart way to float a trial balloon. This might be the license they intend to use with Open Source Solaris 10, but they haven't actually said so. By being close-mouthed, they
How neat. Of course it is a "bad" license (at least from Linux folks point of view), but so what? That doesn't make Solaris 10 bad, because they haven't said what its license will be.
Clever, I think.
Drag had some extended comments on this:
I don't think that it's bad, and usually I am a GPL fan type guy. The only real thing that makes it uncompatable is the patent thing, I beleive. See here: http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html Basicly it's the same license that Mozilla uses. They did clean it up and simplify it a bit, though, and solved a couple issues with it. If you take the code and redistribute binaries you have to make the source code freely aviable. It's non-viral, unlike the GPL and like the LGPL, so you can incoporate the code into a larger body of work without having to change the larger body of work to a compatable license, however the cddl-licensed code and modifications have to still have the same license. The major reason that it would be incompatable with the GPL is that it has a patent termination clause. If you sue somebody for violating a patent and base your claim on CDDL code the person using your suing is using, you lose the right to use and distribute the CDDL code yourself. However GPLv3 is suppose to have some patent protection clauses incorporated into it to, and the GPLv2 has a specific provision that makes it compatable with future GPL versions. So even though the CDDL is now incompatble, it seems likely to me that in the future it will be compatable with Linux/GPL'd code. At least thats my understanding. I am not completely sure and since I am not a lawyer this is not a reliable opinion. It's just my personal observations. All in all this is a pretty decent license. Much better then I would of hoped for. Hopefully the bugs get worked out quickly and Solaris is released under it. Execuative summary of why's behind modifying the MPL license is avaible at http://www.sun.com/cddl/CDDL_why_details.html Under FSF standards (see: Various Licenses and Comments about Them ) the MPL is a valid Free, but not GPL compatable license. --Drag
If you found something useful today, please consider a small donation.
Got something to add? Send me email.
More Articles by Tony Lawrence © 2009-11-07 Tony Lawrence
Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use sed." Now they have two problems. (Jamie Zawinski)