Is anyone at SUNW listening?

Is anyone at SUNW listening?

Comments on the JavaTM Servlet 3.0 Specification JSR Review Ballot

On 2007-06-19 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-06-19 Suleiman, Hani voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 Red Hat Middleware LLC voted Yes with the following comment:
The spec lead of the EE6 specification has confirmed that the EE6 TCK 
would contain no "field of use restrictions", as originally raised by 
Apache with regard to another JSR (i.e. the SE TCK licensing). That is 
a good thing.

However, in the absence of an explicit JSPA rule that would forbid such 
field-of-use restrictions, we will remain worried that a similar issue 
might resurface anytime, for any JSR.

Consequently, in the future, for any submitted JSR (by SUNW or not), we 
will specifically expect the spec lead to provide clear information on 
that aspect and take the answer in account when casting our vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-06-27 BEA Systems voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-01 Google Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a 
vote on the licensing terms.  IBM supports licensing models that create 
an open and level playing field by allowing third parties to create 
independent implementations of Java Specifications and that do not 
allow individuals or companies to exercise unnecessary control for 
proprietary advantage.  We support open source as a licensing model for 
contributions in the JCP, and would hope others will support this 
direction. This comment is not necessarily directed at the current 
business or license terms for this JSR, however, it is a statement of 
IBM's preferred licensing model.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 SAS Institute Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
We agree with the comments accompanying the Red Hat vote.  The Spec 
Lead has told us there are no "field of use restrictions" for this 
particular JSR. TCKs (JCP test suites) are intended to ensure 
compatibility and must not be used to restrict the use of 
implementations of JCP specifications.  Since this issue is so crucial 
to JCP providing open standards, all JCP JSRs should publicly state 
whether they restrict field of use for implementations of JCP specs 
in any of the JCP required licenses.  For every ballot, we will ask 
and will consider that in casting our vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 Apache Software Foundation voted Abstain with the following comment:
The ASF has serious reservations about how the JCP operates following 
Sun's refusal to provide the Java SE TCK to the Apache Harmony project 
under terms complaint with the JSPA. Since Sun has not responded to the 
ASF's open Letter on this matter, the ASF is currently in the process 
of formulating a new policy towards the JCP (see jcp-open@apache.org) 
and all future JSRs will be evaluated in light of that policy. 
Since the policy has not yet been finalized, the ASF reluctantly 
abstains from voting at this time.  This is not a statement about 
the technology.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-07-02 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------