| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Correct / legal way to distribute a Java client to customers |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| MQDeveloper |
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 6:54 am Post subject: Correct / legal way to distribute a Java client to customers |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 21 Oct 2005
Posts: 7
|
I am in the process of adding the ability within my Java-based applications to access (i.e., PUT & GET) to MQSeries (WebSphere MQ) queues. I am just using the MQ Java base classes from com.ibm.mq.jar.
Has anyone used this jar (or for that matter the JMS jar) within your own Java application (not an applet) and sold these applications to customers? If so, how have you distributed the com.ibm.mq.jar and/or the com.ibm.mqjms.jar?
On the WebSphere MQ website, http://www-306.ibm.com/software/integration/wmq/ it states the client is free but when I asked IBM if I may freely distribute the jar with my product, they stated it was to be used for testing purposes only and may not be freely distributed as part of my product.
This kinda confuses me because it makes it impossible to distribute this enhancement to my users without also giving them the com.ibm.mq.jar.
(On a side note, IBM didn't seem to have a problem allowing me to give my customers their jt400.jar - for Java access to the AS/400.) Maybe I asked the wrong person because I know some of my competitors are distributing this jar but I'd hate to get into legality issues.
Any insight into this issue would be most appreciated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Perhaps the reason you got that answer was because you're not including the full MQClient (all the jars) in your distribution. ?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLRowe |
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 664
Location: South East London
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| markt |
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 508
|
You're not going to get a legally-binding definitive answer from here. If you have questions about IBM's licensing terms, you need to talk direct to IBM. And it sounds like you've got an answer that perhaps you don't like(!) but it was "official".
Different products and different components will have different license agreements. So you can't extrapolate from one component to another.
Having said that, there are of course times when it is possible to negotiate DIFFERENT terms and conditions than the default ones, and I know of some specific cases where that's been done. (I'm not going to discuss details). Again, you'd need to discuss that direct with IBM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| RogerLacroix |
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:38 pm Post subject: Re: Correct / legal way to distribute a Java client to custo |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 3264
Location: London, ON Canada
|
Hi,
Mostly definitely there is truth in what markt posted.
MQ at IBM is a relatively small group of people located primary in 3 places: Hursley, Raleigh and some lab in India. By creating a new UserID here at mqseries.net and attempting to post semi-anonymously, this will not work. They probably receive 1 question like yours a month and this will stick out like a sore thumb.
Just because Nigel or Wayne or Jason (or other IBMers who surf here) did not response to your posting, does not mean they did not read it. Or comment on it internally. (IBM has strict rules for employees about making comments on legal matters.) Playing peek-a-boo with IBM is not a wise game.
Anyway, just recently I had 2 situations that highlight the differences.
1) Back in the Spring I required IBM’s sign-off on an Ad for a magazine. I argued with someone at IBM for over a month about the wording of the ad. He would not budge even though I provided sufficient documentation about the correctness of the technical wording. In the end, I had to change the wording of the ad to get it approved.
2) A month ago IBM contacted me about trialing one of my security products. I said that IBM would need to sign a ‘Software Evaluation License Agreement’ and they said fine. After I sent it to them, I figured I was in for months and months of chasing it though the legal hoops at IBM. But 2 days later it was signed, sealed and delivered. And even more surprising, before the trial ended, IBM started purchasing the product.
Dealing with IBM takes patience and persistence.
| MQDeveloper wrote: |
| competitors |
Gee, I wonder who that could be.  
Now most people will be shocked by my next comment and ask why would I help you. Well, I’m a firm believer in open markets and free trade. I hate monopolies or oligopolies. I hate companies that litigate rather than invent. I especially like the economic theories proposed by John contact admin. Hence, by helping you, this will cause more competition. A strong competitive spirit means better products in the long run
Here are my comments:
1) Install the MQ Client v5.3 on a clean box and deselect everything except for Java/JMS libraries (and I do mean everything) and run the install. Take note of exactly what was installed.
2) Your IBM contact may be under the impression that SupportPac MACV is different from the Gold GA CD that IBM supplies for MQ Client v5.3. (This is not true.) So, ask him/her if you included items ‘xxx’ (from my point #1) from the Gold GA CD may you receive approval.
I don’t know if this is your ticket to ride but it should help. As Mark said, every situation is different.
Regards,
Roger Lacroix
Capitalware Inc.
_________________
Capitalware: Transforming tomorrow into today.
Connected to MQ!
Twitter |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
