On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 01:08:31PM +0200, David N. Welton wrote: > > Likewise, you could include a clause like that in the license... "you > may not use the name java blah blah blah unless you pass all our tests > and meet approval and so on and so forth blah blah blah". They did. It's one of the issues Microsoft was dragged into court over. Among other things, Sun also objected to MS' use of Sun's code for what was effectively a different (though strongly related) product.
BTW (and to keep this _slightly_ on topic) I'm not even sure the original versions of Kaffe were legal by the Java licenses as they were at the time. > This leaves you free to create derivates, but means that you can't > pollute the standard. Going by what little I've seen of C#, Eiffel# etc., Microsoft now seems to have gone this way, calling their version of the Java vision and runtime .NET and claiming to support a bunch of programming languages that had already been ported to the JVM anyway. Of course those "supported" languages were castrated to fit a JVM-like model and have lost some of their best features, but let's not get into that... Jeroen
