4 ms·

It works for Oracle (it is famously illegal to publish benchmarks of DB2 vs other engines), I'm sure intel can make it work for them thanks to Oracle's court ca

It works for Oracle (it is famously illegal to publish benchmarks of DB2 vs other engines), I'm sure intel can make it work for them thanks to Oracle's court case(s).

jclulow 8y ago
I'm pretty sure DB2 is an IBM thing.
- TheRealPomax 8y ago
  You're right, it is, I had the wrong DB name.
laumars 8y ago
DB2 is IBM. The court case you were on about was Oracle's RDBMS called Oracle RDBMS. However I believe DB2 might have been used as one of the comparisons against Oracle. Anyhow, specifics aside, you do make a good point.
- TheRealPomax 8y ago
  oops, yeah it would help if I got the names right.
mping 8y ago
I believe you are referring to the DeWitt clause.
throwaway77384 8y ago
So is the below technically illegal? http://phpdao.com/mysql_postgres_oracle_mssql/ http://phpdao.com/mysql_postgres_oracle_mssql/
- gambiting 8y ago
  I think OP is using the wrong term - breaching terms of contract is not illegal in itself. It just means Oracle will not do any more business with you.
  - Rjevski 8y ago
    > Oracle will not do any more business with you Isn't that a blessing?
  - throwaway77384 8y ago
    makes sense. so unless they dedicated the resources to figuring out who did it, etc. it's reasonably moot.
  - sekh60 8y ago
    So what you're saying is that sysadmins should all benchmark Oracle products to prevent their employers from being trapped in Oracle land?
  - TheRealPomax 8y ago
    Breaching terms of contract is most definitely illegal and Oracle can sue any time they want. It's not like trademark law, where you _have_ to sue even if you don't want to; Oracle can ignore anything that comes out not looking bad for them, which still being 100% able to sue the pants off of anyone that goes "hey look this product is worse across the board in real world comparisons to MySQL and MariaDB".
    - Dylan16807 8y ago
      They can sue but it's not illegal, and they very well may not be able to get any money from you for truthful statements.
- dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago
  Technically yes, but Oracle won't sue as the results are favorable for them in this case.
  - throwaway77384 8y ago
    Yeah that was my first thought, too. They are not even losing in this ;)
cm2187 8y ago
But you can't buy an oracle license in a shop around the corner. It is going to be hard for intel to enforce it.
- laumars 8y ago
  Perhaps if Intel were to play honestly then you might have a point. However there's certainly a few ways they could attempt to enforce it through slightly underhanded, yet pretty typical practices for how many multi-nationals like to operate in this day and age. * cease and desist orders. They could probably argue improper use of trademark or something. And by "could" I don't mean "they have a legitimate legal case" but rather "a flimsy one but one that is still scary enough that few people might want to take the risk / expense testing the argument in court. * many benchmarks are ran by reviewers who might have access components before they hit the shelves. It would be trivial for Intel to end that relationship. If it's suppliers further down the chain who are providing samples to journalists and reviewers then Intel might put pressure on those suppliers to end their relationships with said journalists. This might break a few anti-competition laws in the EU but it's not like that's ever stopped businesses in the past. On a tangential rant: I think the real issue isn't so much whether it is enforceable but rather the simple fact that companies are even allowed to muddy the waters about what basic journalistic and/or consumer rights we have. I'm getting rather fed up of some multi-nationals behaving like they're above the law.
- TheRealPomax 8y ago
  I literally got one with a book on databases as a student, so you kind of can? But the power of the argument is that if it's possible to put this kind of clause in place and enforce it by law for something that's harder to get, then Intel putting that clause in place for the general public has legal prescedent when they do want to take someone to court. It actually makes it easier for Intel to argue that chips are such specialized bits of equipment that even though your average joe can _get_ one, they won't understand how it works and so only highly trainer professionals who have been certified by Intel would be able to reliably benchmarks their products. "As the average user would interpret the results incorrectly, their publication would hurt intel's bottom line". And suddenly you're 95% of the way to having won the case already.

It works for Oracle (it is famously illegal to publish benchmarks of DB2 vs other engines), I'm sure intel can make it work for them thanks to Oracle's court case(s).

jclulow 8y ago

I'm pretty sure DB2 is an IBM thing.

TheRealPomax 8y ago
You're right, it is, I had the wrong DB name.

laumars 8y ago

DB2 is IBM. The court case you were on about was Oracle's RDBMS called Oracle RDBMS. However I believe DB2 might have been used as one of the comparisons against Oracle. Anyhow, specifics aside, you do make a good point.

TheRealPomax 8y ago
oops, yeah it would help if I got the names right.

mping 8y ago

I believe you are referring to the DeWitt clause.

throwaway77384 8y ago

So is the below technically illegal? http://phpdao.com/mysql_postgres_oracle_mssql/ http://phpdao.com/mysql_postgres_oracle_mssql/

gambiting 8y ago
I think OP is using the wrong term - breaching terms of contract is not illegal in itself. It just means Oracle will not do any more business with you.
- Rjevski 8y ago
  > Oracle will not do any more business with you Isn't that a blessing?
- throwaway77384 8y ago
  makes sense. so unless they dedicated the resources to figuring out who did it, etc. it's reasonably moot.
- sekh60 8y ago
  So what you're saying is that sysadmins should all benchmark Oracle products to prevent their employers from being trapped in Oracle land?
- TheRealPomax 8y ago
  Breaching terms of contract is most definitely illegal and Oracle can sue any time they want. It's not like trademark law, where you _have_ to sue even if you don't want to; Oracle can ignore anything that comes out not looking bad for them, which still being 100% able to sue the pants off of anyone that goes "hey look this product is worse across the board in real world comparisons to MySQL and MariaDB".
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    They can sue but it's not illegal, and they very well may not be able to get any money from you for truthful statements.
dvfjsdhgfv 8y ago
Technically yes, but Oracle won't sue as the results are favorable for them in this case.
- throwaway77384 8y ago
  Yeah that was my first thought, too. They are not even losing in this ;)

cm2187 8y ago

But you can't buy an oracle license in a shop around the corner. It is going to be hard for intel to enforce it.

laumars 8y ago
Perhaps if Intel were to play honestly then you might have a point. However there's certainly a few ways they could attempt to enforce it through slightly underhanded, yet pretty typical practices for how many multi-nationals like to operate in this day and age. * cease and desist orders. They could probably argue improper use of trademark or something. And by "could" I don't mean "they have a legitimate legal case" but rather "a flimsy one but one that is still scary enough that few people might want to take the risk / expense testing the argument in court. * many benchmarks are ran by reviewers who might have access components before they hit the shelves. It would be trivial for Intel to end that relationship. If it's suppliers further down the chain who are providing samples to journalists and reviewers then Intel might put pressure on those suppliers to end their relationships with said journalists. This might break a few anti-competition laws in the EU but it's not like that's ever stopped businesses in the past. On a tangential rant: I think the real issue isn't so much whether it is enforceable but rather the simple fact that companies are even allowed to muddy the waters about what basic journalistic and/or consumer rights we have. I'm getting rather fed up of some multi-nationals behaving like they're above the law.
TheRealPomax 8y ago
I literally got one with a book on databases as a student, so you kind of can? But the power of the argument is that if it's possible to put this kind of clause in place and enforce it by law for something that's harder to get, then Intel putting that clause in place for the general public has legal prescedent when they do want to take someone to court. It actually makes it easier for Intel to argue that chips are such specialized bits of equipment that even though your average joe can _get_ one, they won't understand how it works and so only highly trainer professionals who have been certified by Intel would be able to reliably benchmarks their products. "As the average user would interpret the results incorrectly, their publication would hurt intel's bottom line". And suddenly you're 95% of the way to having won the case already.