By William Fellows
Sun Microsystems Inc has altered Java’s business model so that in future it will collect royalties only on Java products shipped. It has also changed the terms and conditions for using Java and made concessions towards the ‘open source’ model of software development. Essentially Sun is abandoning the one-time license fee it has previously charged to its 195 licensees. The royalties remain about the same, said Java Software president Alan Baratz. Sun expects that, by enabling any company to download Java source code, and with it a free license enabling them to modify the code, it can greatly increase revenue opportunities. However, Sun COO Ed Zander declined to put a number on exactly how much more the Java 2 ‘community license’ model will make for his boss, Sun CEO Scott McNealy. (Java 2 is the new name for what has previously been known as JDK 1.2). Sun says the basic idea behind the new license model is to open up the Java source model as much as possible while maintaining compatibility. And, implicitly, without giving the competition enough rope to hang it with. As such, Sun is treading a fine line. Microsoft Corp Java manager Charles Fitzgerald has already been widely quoted as saying that Sun is making it increasingly attractive for Microsoft to do an independent Java development.
IBM to lead real-time expert group
Under the new model, Sun says companies that extend Java source code will not be required to return their extensions to Sun. However, licensees will be able to resell Sun’s Java platform class libraries, but only to other licensees. As expected, Sun is also creating a process to enable third parties, including non- licensees, to participate in an expert group and license review process that will guide development of the core Java platform. In addition it will sanction certain API development initiatives led by third parties so long as they adhere to Sun’s published API specification process. IBM Corp has been sanctioned to lead a group developing real-time extensions to Java, presumably going head-to-head with Hewlett-Packard Co and its Real Time Working Group cronies, while Xilinx Corp is developing an API for the boundary scan market. Sun has also defined a collection of what it calls ‘Standard Extensions’ that will be offered as an optional package for vendors to extend the core Java platform, as well as a process for creating additional Standard Extensions. Those available now include Java 3D; the Java naming and directory interface; Java Servlet; JavaMail; and Java Media Framework. As with the rest of the new license model, when these APIs are shipped to end users as part of finished products, or are used internally as part of production systems, royalties are due to Sun. Moreover, all licensees, whether they are primary contract holders, VARs, or sub-licensees, must pass Sun’s Java compatibility tests, even if they don’t pass IP back to Sun. In addition to the test suites, licensees must also take out a support contract with Sun due to the complexity of the test suites themselves. As evidence, Sun says none among its current licensees have been able to operate the test suites comprehensively without its help. However, Sun VP Java technology and architecture Jim Mitchell told ComputerWire that the company plans to make the tests more modular over the coming quarter and also plans to transfer responsibility for testing and branding over to an industry body when it can. Although IP used to modify Java source does not have to be returned to Sun, third parties contributing to the Java platform or extensions under the new development model will have to make IP and patents available under the new license model. Sun, which says this process merely operates a standard industry procedure, says royalties from products shipped will be paid back to third parties based on their contribution. There may also be some special instances where IP or patent work may not have to be given up Sun said, but that would appear to be a matter for very unique dispensation. Terms and conditions for joining one or more of the groups via a participation agreement are available for review, it says, although it wasn’t able to provide such a document at its event yesterday.
