> We think that Amazon’s behavior is inconsistent with the norms and values that are especially important in the open source ecosystem. It is not, Elastic does

> We think that Amazon’s behavior is inconsistent with the norms and values that are especially important in the open source ecosystem. It is not, Elastic does not have a monopoly on what open-source is or mean. > Our license change is aimed at preventing companies from taking our Elasticsearch and Kibana products and providing them directly as a service without collaborating with us. Therefore they admit that their market strategy was bad to being with. A lot of open-source technology is being used extensively by AWS/Azure/GCP. I don't see the maintainers of Kubernetes, MariaDB, [insert your favorite OSS project] or even Linux arguing that they are somehow owed money for a product they voluntarily distributed under a permissive license. > When Amazon announced their Open Distro for Elasticsearch fork, they used code that we believe was copied by a third party from our commercial code and provided it as part of the Open Distro project. We believe this further divided our community and drove additional confusion. Then sue them and be done with it. Every time this particular subject comes up I get slightly riled up because it is just a display of misplaced after-the-fact outrage over poor business development planning. Elastic grew because of that open source license and benefitted from a wide adoption because of it. Now that they realized that giving away software isn't a great way to make money they pull this bait-and-switch and expect "the community" to blame the big bad company.