4 ms·

Groklaw, a well-respected blog that deals with open source legal issues, seems to have a different take on it, namely that Widenius, as operator of a competing

Groklaw, a well-respected blog that deals with open source legal issues, seems to have a different take on it, namely that Widenius, as operator of a competing database company based on a fork of MySQL, pretty much just wants to strip the GPL from MySQL so that he and others can develop completely closed-source databases based on it. Article: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091208104422384 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091208104422384 His blog post sounds all pro-open-source until you get down to the suggestions, where it several times references forcing Oracle to relicense more permissively (removing restrictions against closed-source derivatives) while also denying Oracle the right to make closed-source modules. It sounds like the guy sold MySQL for a billion dollars, and now wants to be handed the rights to use the code in a closed source program while denying Oracle (who paid for Sun who paid for MySQL) the ability to do the same.

bad_user 17y ago
> pretty much just wants to strip the GPL from MySQL so that he and others can develop completely closed-source databases based on it. So what's the problem with that?
- ig1 17y ago
  Legally nothing. But he used to have to right to do that (the MySql dual licence), but he sold it for a large amount of money to Sun. Now he's arguing that if Oracle buys Sun they should give away for free that same right he sold. If he truly believed that it should be free, he could have made it free when he owned it. He wants the benefit of selling it (money) and the benefits of not selling it (ownership) at the same time. He's trying to use the open source community for his own commercial self-interest. That's why people are finding it objectionable.
- ZachPruckowski 17y ago
  >> pretty much just wants to strip the GPL from MySQL so that he and others can develop completely closed-source databases based on it. > So what's the problem with that? Nothing. It's just that he sold the right to do that to Sun for a billion dollars, and now wants the EU to give it back to him for free. If he wanted to build a closed source DB off of MySQL code, he should have done so when he owned the source.

bad_user 17y ago

> pretty much just wants to strip the GPL from MySQL so that he and others can develop completely closed-source databases based on it. So what's the problem with that?

ig1 17y ago
Legally nothing. But he used to have to right to do that (the MySql dual licence), but he sold it for a large amount of money to Sun. Now he's arguing that if Oracle buys Sun they should give away for free that same right he sold. If he truly believed that it should be free, he could have made it free when he owned it. He wants the benefit of selling it (money) and the benefits of not selling it (ownership) at the same time. He's trying to use the open source community for his own commercial self-interest. That's why people are finding it objectionable.
ZachPruckowski 17y ago
>> pretty much just wants to strip the GPL from MySQL so that he and others can develop completely closed-source databases based on it. > So what's the problem with that? Nothing. It's just that he sold the right to do that to Sun for a billion dollars, and now wants the EU to give it back to him for free. If he wanted to build a closed source DB off of MySQL code, he should have done so when he owned the source.