2 ms·

Doesn't matter, because Shay's argument is that they own the trademark for Elasticsearch, which is absolutely correct: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f

Doesn't matter, because Shay's argument is that they own the trademark for Elasticsearch, which is absolutely correct: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4802:y6ym2l.2.2 http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4802:y6y... Doesn't matter who has contributed to the project - whoever they are they own rights to keep the code base open and licensed open, but they don't own the name or the trademark rights. It would be well within Elastic's rights to change the name on the repo. Remember the whole Docker/Moby thing?

byefruit 6y ago
Does not being able to call itself Elasticsearch make a fork inoperable? I don't think wanting to protect a brand they've been investing in for years is unreasonable. Don't get me wrong. It would be great if Elastic, Redis and co didn't have to do this (change license) but AWS does pose an existential threat to their business models long term. I'd rather a standardised, so there's less fear around interpretations, more restrictive license than the businesses and _future_ ones becoming unviable.