1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
|
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
<!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays licensing traps" -->
<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
<title>The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time - GNU Project - Free
Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/sun-in-night-time.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
<div class="article reduced-width">
<h2>The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time</h2>
<address class="byline">by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard
Stallman</a></address>
<div class="infobox">
<p>We leave this web page in place for the sake of history,
but as of December 2006, Sun is in the middle of <a
href="https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-welcomes-gpl-java.html">rereleasing
its Java platform under the GNU GPL</a>. When this license change is
completed, we expect Sun's Java will be free software.</p>
</div>
<hr class="thin" />
<p><i>May 24, 2006</i></p>
<p>
Our community has been abuzz with the rumor that Sun has made
its implementation Java free software (or “open
source”). Community leaders even publicly thanked Sun
for its contribution. What is Sun's new contribution to the
FLOSS community?
</p>
<p>
Nothing. Absolutely nothing—and that's what makes the
response to this non-incident so curious.
</p>
<p>
Sun's Java implementation remains proprietary software, just
as before. It doesn't come close to meeting the criteria for
<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software</a>, or the
similar but slightly looser criteria for open source. Its
source code is available only under an NDA.
</p>
<p>
So what did Sun actually do? It allowed more convenient
redistribution of the binaries of its Java platform. With
this change, GNU/Linux distros can include the nonfree Sun
Java platform, just as some now include the nonfree nVidia
driver. But they do so only at the cost of being nonfree.
</p>
<p>
The Sun license has one restriction that may ironically
reduce the tendency for users to accept nonfree software
without thinking twice: it insists that the operating system
distributor get the user's explicit agreement to the license
before letting the user install the code. This means the
system cannot silently install Sun's Java platform without
warning users they have nonfree software, as some GNU/Linux
systems silently install the nVidia driver.
</p>
<p>
If you look closely at Sun's announcement, you will see that
it accurately represents these facts. It does not say that
Sun's Java platform is free software, or even open source. It
only predicts that the platform will be “widely
available” on “leading open source
platforms.” Available, that is, as proprietary
software, on terms that deny your freedom.
</p>
<p>
Why did this non-incident generate a large and confused
reaction? Perhaps because people do not read these
announcements carefully. Ever since the term “open
source” was coined, we have seen companies find ways to
use it and their product name in the same sentence. (They
don't seem to do this with “free software,”
though they could if they wanted to.) The careless reader
may note the two terms in proximity and falsely assume that
one talks about the other.
</p>
<p>
Some believe that this non-incident represents Sun's
exploratory steps towards eventually releasing its Java
platform as free software. Let's hope Sun does that some
day. We would welcome that, but we should save our
appreciation for the day that actually occurs. In the mean
time, the <a href="/philosophy/java-trap.html">Java Trap</a>
still lies in wait for the work of programmers who don't take
precautions to avoid it.
</p>
<p>
We in the GNU Project continue developing the
GNU Compiler for Java and
GNU Classpath; we made great progress in the past year,
so our free platform for Java is included in many major
GNU/Linux distros. If you want to run Java and have freedom,
please join in and help.
</p>
</div>
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
<div class="unprintable">
<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>.
There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p>
<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
replace it with the translation of these two:
We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
<web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p>
<p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of
our web pages, see <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a>. -->
Please see the <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations
of this article.</p>
</div>
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this
without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
document was modified, or published.
If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
<p>Copyright © 2006, 2021 Richard Stallman</p>
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
$Date: 2021/10/01 10:55:57 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
</body>
</html>
|
