Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] How to name implementation of javax.* and jakarta.* APIs?

Thanks for the clarification. Good to know.

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich
Sent: 22 May 2019 12:54
To: jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] How to name implementation of javax.* and jakarta.* APIs?

 

 

Strictly speaking the Eclipse Foundation does *not* have a trademark agreement with Oracle. We have a copyright license, but have no special rights whatsoever to any of Oracle's trademarks.

 

However, the salient point from my perspective is what I wrote in my blog post "Update on Jakarta EE Rights to Java Trademarks".

In addition to the above, any specifications which use the javax namespace will continue to carry the certification and container requirements which Java EE has had in the past. I.e., implementations which claim compliance with any version of the Jakarta EE specifications using the javax namespace must test on and distribute containers which embed certified Java SE implementations licensed by Oracle. These restrictions do not apply to Jakarta EE specifications which do not utilize javax, including future revisions of the platform specifications which eliminate javax.

This means that any Jakarta EE *specifications* that contains even a single javax namespace has Oracle-imposed runtime restrictions that may or may not be good for the community. 

 

From the point of view of an implementer, I don't think that there would be any restrictions on claiming that a single version of Eclipse Jetty supports both Jakarta EE 8 (using javax) and Jakarta EE 9 (perhaps 100% using jakarta).

 

Does that help?

 

 

On 2019-05-22 7:18 a.m., Steve Millidge (Payara) wrote:

Hi Greg,

 

I think this depends on the agreement that has been signed by the Eclipse Foundation. From a “bare license” and pure fair use trademark point of view you may be correct. However as there is a trademark agreement between Eclipse and Oracle then that is the primary consideration for Eclipse projects.

 

IANAL

 

Steve

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Greg Wilkins
Sent: 22 May 2019 12:14
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] How to name implementation of javax.* and jakarta.* APIs?

 

 

All,

 

to start answering my own question, I do think there is reasonable fair-use case to say implementation can use the trademarks:

Of course I'm not a lawyer.... so I'd still love some feedback from Eclipse Foundation on this.  Note that we already do have some un released code checked into eclipse repositories that use the Javax name as a class prefix or partial package name.

 

regards

 

 

On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 09:40, Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

The jetty project is  looking at the naming consequences of the transition with regards to implementation names (eg module names and classnames).   Let's consider the websocket API.  It will soon be the case that a container may wish to offer it's webapps the choice of using the javax.* version of the API or the jakarta.* version.

 

Would be be allowable (with regards to trademarks) to have the various modules, classes and options for those to use javax and jakarta in their names.    For example the user could choose between enabling modules websocket-javax and websocket-jakarta, which internally might enable classes like org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.javax.* and org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.jakarta.*, which are configured with parameters etc. that also might include javax and jakarta?    

 

Or is that going to run foul of one or more trademarks?  Are there fair use provisions that allows us the use these trademarks in the names of things that work with the APIs of those trademarks?

 

If so,  are there similar issues with the use of ee ?   Ie could the modules be called websocket-ee8 and websocket-ee9, which internally refer to classes like org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.ee8.* and org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.ee9.*  etc.  ?    Is this usage still OK if it is within an non certified container that does not implement the full ee stack?  Is ee subject to trademarks?

 

Is this something the Eclipse Foundation can get legal advice on?  Or is the answer known already?

 

regards

 

 

 

 


Back to the top