Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: Forbes article on "GPL hit men" mentions PostgreSQL

Forbes article on "GPL hit men" mentions PostgreSQL

From
"Ned Lilly"
Date:
... sort of.  As an afterthought to a discussion of the Progress/NuSphere/PeerDirect tussle with MySQL:

"Now he says he is cautious about working with GPL software. Instead, Progress uses an open source database program
distributedunder the less onerous Berkeley Software Distribution license." 

http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/14/cz_dl_1014linksys.html

As the FSF gets more and more ambitious with their GPL enforcement, this further highlights the business-friendly
natureof the PostgreSQL BSD license.

Re: Forbes article on "GPL hit men" mentions PostgreSQL

From
Josh Berkus
Date:
Ned,

> As the FSF gets more and more ambitious with their GPL enforcement, this
> further highlights the business-friendly nature of the PostgreSQL BSD
> license.

There's a can o' worms I *really* don't want to open up.   Starting the BSD
vs. GPL flamewars again will not benefit our project.

Also, don't ya love how Forbes attacks the FSF for license enforcement, but
seems to accept the BSA's tactics as normal?

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

Re: Forbes article on "GPL hit men" mentions PostgreSQL

From
Christopher Browne
Date:
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, josh@agliodbs.com (Josh Berkus) wrote:
> Also, don't ya love how Forbes attacks the FSF for license enforcement, but
> seems to accept the BSA's tactics as normal?

Indeed.  Apparently what is moral for the goose is not moral for the
gander (or the FSF).

The problem in this situation is that Cisco (/LinkSys) have adopted
code for their systems, and been cavalier about licensing.

The notion that there was any "trickery" involved should be put away.

These companies retain lawyers; they presumably pass on licenses to
their legal departments when that situation comes up, except that they
apparently weren't careful at least in this case.

They are "big guys" that, with their considerable portfolios of
products, patents, trademarks, and other "intellectual properties,"
should be doing this stuff rightly.  If they didn't do any "due
diligence" on this, I can't be too terribly sympathetic.
--
output = reverse("gro.gultn" "@" "enworbbc")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/
Debugging is twice  as hard as writing   the code in the first  place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as  possible, you are, by
definition, not smart enough to debug it.  -- Brian W. Kernighan

Re: Forbes article on "GPL hit men" mentions PostgreSQL

From
Shridhar Daithankar
Date:
Christopher Browne wrote:

> A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, josh@agliodbs.com (Josh Berkus) wrote:
>
>>Also, don't ya love how Forbes attacks the FSF for license enforcement, but
>>seems to accept the BSA's tactics as normal?
>
>
> Indeed.  Apparently what is moral for the goose is not moral for the
> gander (or the FSF).
>
> The problem in this situation is that Cisco (/LinkSys) have adopted
> code for their systems, and been cavalier about licensing.
>
> The notion that there was any "trickery" involved should be put away.
>
> These companies retain lawyers; they presumably pass on licenses to
> their legal departments when that situation comes up, except that they
> apparently weren't careful at least in this case.

I agree. Recently a codeveloper asked me aboutusing a GPL java lib. in a
commercial project. I could advice him to persuade the author to release it
under LGPL.

It is right of authors to choose the license. And I doubt GPL contains anything
that prohibits using it in a commercial product, especially when LGPL exists.

And yes, let's not start BSD against GPL war. Let people choose what they want.
Both the licenses have their place. Thats the only truth out there..:-)

  Shridhar