Featured Articles
Announcing Pi
Technical Specifications
Raspberry Pi FAQs
Win a Pi
Raspberry Pi Wishlist
Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 15 replies
  • Subscribers 708 subscribers
  • Views 2920 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

A Blood Curdling Scream!

jack.chaney56

Do not let this happen!

 

image

 

i saw the newest RPI weekly with the picture of the new weather station package, and noticed the warning label "Oracle". I understand they are a great group that is happy to provide support to the Raspberry Pi community, but believe me, it is never without a cost. Case in point, MySQL, used to be free and released under the open source agreement, but when Oracle purchased Sun, it decided to include MySQL in with the assets, and now, for extended capabilities, like re-selling an application using the core module, requires purchase of a license. MySQL was incorporated under the GPL, which doesn't change based on who is supporting it.

 

My comment for this discussion is to serve as a warning, beware of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

 

Jack

  • in reply to jack.chaney56

    Right. The Intent is that modifications are given back to the community. To prevent lots of different forks each with their own enhancement.

     

    But the intent is also to give FREEDOM. So for example I have the right to take the sources and study, modify and enhance them to my hearts content without giving back to the community if I so choose. It's just that I'm not allowed to redistribute binaries with those changes. This is one of the freedoms that the GPL gives me.

     

    With respect to "giving back to the community", although that is the intent, the GPL was written at a time that "you have to put it on your website for free download for all" was not yet possible. So they formulated in such a way that if you distributed binaries to someone you have to EITHER include the sources, OR be willing to provide those sources on demand.

     

    The intentions of the FSF/RMS are clear. They have written down rules by which to abide, which they thought would accomplish their goals.

     

    Independent of what you or I think what their goals are, we have to follow the rules that have been written down. Even if you think that following some rules to the letter does not coincide with your intent, or what you think the FSF's intent was.

  • Jack Chaney wrote:

     

    and noticed the warning label "Oracle".

    Brilliant! image

  • in reply to gadget.iom

    Their logo is usually red, the signs are all there! : )

  • in reply to rew

    I seem to have lost something in translation...

     

    I am not trying to assert the virtues of the GPL or open source (which is another of my quests), the point I am asserting is, when Oracle, purchased Sun, the listing of assets in the bill of sale included MySQL, which was, and should have remained owned by the open source community. Sun was never the "owner" of MySQL, but, only a supporter and contributor.  Because they didn't own it, there is no clear ability to transfer ownership to Oracle.

     

    Jack

  • in reply to jack.chaney56

    The thing about the GPL that I've only recently come to understand completely (maybe because of this thread, or something on hackaday), is that dual licencing is possible.

     

    If I write a book (*), the normal procedure is that I own the copyright, I licence say penguin books to print the books provided they pass a commission to me. I allow Amazon to sell Kindle copies, provided they pass a commission to me. And maybe I set the condition that they ONLY sell the electronic kindle copies. The situation is that I own the copyright, copying is prohibited by default, and I can grant permission to make copies and set the conditions for that permission any way I want.

     

    Next I write a program. I own the copyright. I can "grant permission to make copies" any way I like. I can for example, use the GPL to set conditions on the "making copies".

    On the other hand, I could ALSO give permission to make copies to someone else, but set a different batch of conditions. This is the dual licencing that sometimes happens. And it is what Oracle offers to do.

     

    That said, MySQL was originally written by MySLQ AB. They basically owned the copyright on anything they wrote. They got bought by Sun in 2008 and Sun got bought by Oracle in 2010. Those copyrights passed on to Oracle, in a perfectly legal way.

     

    There is the question of patches and submissions. Has the community every provided patches that were included in the "mainline" sources? If so, the author of those patches by default has copyright on that portion. This would officially make it difficult to impossible for the "main" copyright holder to give out the "right to make copies" under a different licence. For the included patches they would have to get permission to do so from all patch-authors.

     

    A way to prevent this situation is to ask the authors to sign over the copyright holdership to the main-copyright holder. This is what the FSF is doing. If I write a useful patch for "sort" (#), they want me to sign over the copyrights to them. This would allow them to legally licence my code to someone else under a non-GPL licence. For the Linux kernel, Linus Torvalds knowingly does NOT request patch authors to do so. It is now impossible to get permission from ALL 6000 contributors to licence the Linux kernel under a different licence.

     

    If MySQL AB and Sun have always refused patches and fixed bugs in a "clean room" setup without looking at the submitted patches for problems.... then Oracle can legally relicence MySQL under a different (closed) licence. If in the history of MySQL patches from others have been included (as seems likely), then the authors of those patches can demand that Oracle NOT represent them in giving out a different licence to others. Or set conditions under which that licencing can happen. Maybe some money would need to change hands...

     

    (*) This is made up. I don't write books.

    (#) This is true. I write patches to sort.