MySQL changes license to avoid GPLv3 (Business Review Online) [LWN.net]

MySQL changes license to avoid GPLv3 (Business Review Online)

Posted Jan 7, 2007 11:59 UTC (Sun) by zotz (guest, #26117)
In reply to: MySQL changes license to avoid GPLv3 (Business Review Online) by emkey
Parent article: MySQL changes license to avoid GPLv3 (Business Review Online)

[Aren't they essentially drawing a line in the sand and saying "no version of MySQL beyond this one can be made GPL V3 without our permission"?]

Sounds about right. The problem is that the line about not wanting to be forced to go to GPLv3 sounds like hogwash. What they are doing instead is preventing users from choosing to go to GPLv3 for new releases.

Even without the change, no one could have forced them to go to GPLv3. (If I have this wrong, please explain it to me.)

all the best,

drew

(Log in to post comments)

MySQL changes license to avoid GPLv3 (Business Review Online)

Posted Jan 8, 2007 10:47 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

They've always required that contributers assign them the copyright of the code they are willing to accept into MySQL.

So if they are taking a adversarial approach...
It would make sense if they are afraid that somebody will fork it under licensing religious convictions and that fork gain steam. If this is true then their position is weakened somewhat by the fact that somebody can fork a previous version... but it will still have some effect non-the-less.

But that is still strange to me. Forks based on religious convictions probably don't have a long shelf life... especially when the fork ceases to be compatable.

The only thing that realy makes sense is if they just aren't thinking very clearly (which is something that is as likely as anything) or they are doing it in order to avoid flamewars.

Because realy.. they control the copyright. Weither or not it's GPL3 compatable or not is realy irrelevent. Mysterious. It doesn't make sense no matter how I look at it. Why would they sacrifice license compatability?

Maybe it's realated to Patent stuff? What patents do they license from other people or own themselves? That could make sense if that is a issue with them currently and it is not something they are going to talk about in public.

MySQL changes license to avoid GPLv3 (Business Review Online)

Posted Jan 9, 2007 13:45 UTC (Tue) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link]

"Maybe it's realated to Patent stuff?"

That is an interesting thought that had not occurred to me up to now.

I will have to chew on that and the possibilities it raises.

So far I had:

1. Not thinking clearly, not understanding the license.
2. Publicity. (Why? Dangerous?)
3. Political statement. (Aimed at FSF?)
4. Desire to limit users options. (Why? For control purposes?)
5. Leverage to use in molding GPLv3. (Possible?)

Can you add any others?

all the best,

drew