These are the final results of the Final Approval Ballot for JSR #280. The Executive Committee for ME has not approved this ballot.

JSR280

StageFinal Approval Ballot

Ballot durationJun 26, 2007 to Jul 9, 2007

Votes

ME

BenQ Corporation

Dautelle, Jean-Marie

Ericsson AB

IBM

Intel Corp.

Motorola

Nokia Corporation

NTT DoCoMo, Inc.

Orange France SA

Philips Electronics UK Ltd

Research In Motion, LTD (RIM)

Samsung Electronics Corporation

Siemens AG

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Vodafone Group Services Limited

Vote Log

ME

On 2007-07-05 Nokia Corporation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-06 Dautelle, Jean-Marie voted No with the following comment:
Fine JSR. Unfortunately, it had been brought to our attention that the license terms are incompatible with the JSPA (e.g. no redistribution of the RI allowed). Therefore, I would recommend resubmitting this JSR with compatible license terms (then you will have my vote).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Philips Electronics UK Ltd voted No with the following comment:
We cannot support this while the license terms appear to be incompatible with the JSPA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 NTT DoCoMo, Inc. voted Abstain with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Research In Motion, LTD (RIM) voted No with the following comment:
RIM votes NO because of the license issues raised by others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Intel Corp. voted No with the following comment:
The Spec Leads need to assure the community that the licensing regime for JSR 280 will meet the spirit and the letter of the JSPA. Our preference for accomplishing this would be for the Spec Leads to provide the text of TCK and RI licenses that they commit to offer to any interested party and that meet the requirements of the JSPA. 

Questions on this JSR from the EC have focused on the RI license.  The Spec Leads have distributed to the EC a sample RI license. While we have no objection to the Spec Leads offering that license as one alternative, its restrictions on redistribution make it unacceptable in the role of the fulfilling the Spec Leads obligations for RI licensing as expressed in the JSPA.

To avoid any possible confusion, we note that RI licensing is a separate and distinct issue from TCK licensing, which has potentially a more wide-ranging impact than RI licensing, as exemplified by the situation encountered with JSR 176 Java SE 5. The Apache Open Letter on JSR 176 Java SE 5 claimed that field of use restrictions are being imposed on how Independent Implementations of the spec can be used. JCP requirements for licensing compatibility tests must not be used to limit or restrict Independent Implementations of JCP specs.  We would be more comfortable if the Spec Lead had supplied a complete sample TCK license, but we are hopeful that, nevertheless, TCK licensing will not be an issue for JSR 280.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Samsung Electronics Corporation voted No with the following comment:
Samsung cannot support this because the incompatibility between the JSPA and the license term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Siemens AG voted Abstain with the following comment:
Siemens abstained because of the open license issues
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB voted No with the following comment:
SEMC votes no because of Licensing issues raised by others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-09 Orange France SA voted Abstain with the following comment:
Permission to distribute the reference implementation should be explicitly mentioned in the license.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-06-28 BenQ Corporation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-06-29 IBM voted No with the following comment:
IBM votes NO on this JSR because the submission provided by the Specification Lead appears to be inconsistent with the terms of the Java Specification Participation Agreement (JSPA).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-03 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------