Re: reg license implications in implementing/using the JDBC spec

On 29 September 2016 at 14:01, Mark Rotteveel <mark(at)lawinegevaar(dot)nl> wrote:

> On 2016-09-29 02:44, Prasad Varakur wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I am trying to understand how far the pgsql-jdbc driver is compliant
>> with the JDBC-spec license. First couple of pages of the spec has
>> license terms:
>>
>> http://download.oracle.com/otn-pub/jcp/jdbc-4_1-mrel-spec/
>> jdbc4.1-fr-spec.pdf
>>
>> - clause(1) seems to grant license for evaluation purpose
>>
>
> Clause 1 is for when **you** (as a user of JDBC) want to read the
> specification (or when you consider implementing). Clause 2 is only for
> implementors and distributors
>
> - clause(2) seems to grant license for compliant implementations as
>> defined by (a)-(c), which has to be a fully compliant implementation
>> which can pass the JDBC-TCK.
>>
>> As I understand, the pgsql-jdbc is not evaluation, nor is a fully
>> compliant implementation. Documentation also states, it has postgres
>> specific extensions to the spec.
>>
>
> Postgres specific extensions are allowed as long those extensions are not
> in the "Licensor Name Space" (ie java.sql, javax.sql, com.sun, sun, oracle,
> com.oracle etc). I'm not sure a fully compliant JDBC driver actually exists
> (not even the Oracle driver isn't as far as I am aware). In my opinion the
> spirit of the license is likely more to prevent drivers with extremely
> differing behavior which would make JDBC almost impossible to use as a
> database independent API.

as a data point I'm pretty sure the MySql driver is not compliant either.

>
>
>
>> With this, my Qs are:
>> 1) Is pgsql-jdbc a legitimate implementation of JDBC-spec,
>> conforming to the JDBC license terms? If so, how?
>>
>
> Technically probably not (just like most JDBC drivers). Getting access to
> the TCK is an annoying bureaucracy for open source projects or individuals,
> and expensive for companies (especially because for unclear reasons it is
> part of the JavaSE TCK instead of a separate TCK).
>
> 2) Does postgres-JDBC Group obtained special license from
>> Oracle/jdbc-Spec-owner for this implementation of pgsql-jdbc.
>>
>
> Can't answer that, but I assume not very likely.
>
> 3) Are users of pgsql-jdbc also considered violating
>> jdbc-spec-license terms, if pgsql-jdbc is not a legitimate
>> implementation of the JDBC-spec.
>>
>
> Not likely, because of clause 3, and the fact that clause 2 only applies
> to entities **implementing** (or distributing) a JDBC driver, not to end
> users.
>
> Disclaimer: IANAL.
>
> However in the broad picture: in the past (almost) 20 years, there have
> been no legal actions (or threats) against JDBC driver vendors, which
> pretty much indicates that the status quo is considered acceptable (and
> Oracle is not really known to be non-litigious). Also consider the fact
> that it is in the best interest of Oracle to have a good eco-system of
> database drivers.
>
> The language of the license is probably more to prevent a "Microsoft Java"
> or a "Google Android Java", or in other words: people taking a lot of ideas
> set forth in the spec, but not intending to adhere to it in all aspects.
>
> In short: don't worry.
>
> Mark
>
> PS I sent this to the OP by private email earlier; would it be possible to
> configure the list to use the list address as a Reply-To?

Not my list to configure...

Dave Cramer

davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com
www.postgresintl.com

>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
>