Well yeah, that's the point. MongoDB's business model before was trying to sell Amazon CD's. Then they turned the screws on that and switched to an even more on

Well yeah, that's the point. MongoDB's business model before was trying to sell Amazon CD's. Then they turned the screws on that and switched to an even more onerous license that a company like Amazon wasn't going to accept, so they wrote their own replacement. If it's an economic lesson in anything it's that companies and individual open source users alike are going to be a lot more careful about using any project where one for-profit company demands copyright assignment and can re-license the project at any time to squeeze existing users. MongoDB's bet was that they had enough of a moat that Amazon et al would fold up and accept their new terms, that was obviously miscalculated, but there still might be other similar cloud companies who'll fold. But both Amazon and other users are going to be a lot more careful in the future to not run critical infrastructure on some project that's likely to be subject to a future bait & switch by upstream.