Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MongoDB switches up its open source license

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 487 posts

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#21

Post by michaelcampbell »

a012 wrote: post #11

Could this move of Mongodb inc. makes the comeback of the rethinkdb? I hope so

You seem like you know something about rethink. I do not, and couldn't find this information but maybe you know?

One irritating feature of Mongo (and I suppose other db's too; orientdb does this) is that once it grabs disk space, it never lets it go. It'll reuse that space, but the OS will never see it again. (EG: If I store 10GB of stuff, and delete 9GB of it, the OS still sees all 10GB of disk used).

Does rethink do this as well?

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#22

Post by shadowmint »

vslira wrote: post #18

I'm not an expert in licenses, could someone weight in and explain how the AGPLv3 was being abused? Did the mentioned companies follow the spirit of the license and were getting away with something the company didn't like or were they just improperly distributing the software, regardless of licensing terms? Also: "So while the SSPL isn’t all that different from the GNU GPLv3,(...) [it] explicitly states that anybody…

https://webassets.mongodb.com/_com_assets/legal/SSPL-compare...

“Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available.”

^ not the same.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#23

Post by nemo44x »

manishsharan wrote: post #10

This is a bad move and does not inspire confidence. Instead of switching the license, they should have gone after companies that were abusing the terms of GNU AGPLv3 license.

How would they litigate against a mega corporation? Mongo is a very small company compared to many cloud providers. They would be tied up in the courts for years and spend hundreds of millions and possibly drive the company into bankruptcy.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#24

Post by hendzen »

beck5 wrote: post #20

The article references cloud providers, "especially in Asia", frustrating MongoDb, does anyone know which companies these are or specifically what they have done which other did not?

Yandex is one example: https://cloud.yandex.ru/docs/mdb/

Probably the big public cloud providers in China (Alibaba etc) as well.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#25

Post by zokier »

The license is clearly based on (A)GPL which is copyrighted by FSF, and has the following notice: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed."

Does that mean that MongoDB is now infringing on FSF copyright of the license text itself?

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#26

Post by zzzcpan »

reacharavindh wrote: post #2

At the outset, it sounds simple that MongoDB inc thinks why should some 3rd party cloud provider (AWS, GCP, DO and the like) be allowed to run MongoDB as a service and make money while MongoDB contributes the biggest part of the open source project that is MongoDB. But, it feels like yet another fallacy. What really is an open source project then? Say some developer X contributes to a project like MongoDB his/her ope…

But you can still offer it as a service, just as long as you opensource your infrastructure. The only thing it prevents you is profiting from lock-in of your services without sharing those profits with MongoDB. Very much in the spirit of open source.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#27

Post by hendzen »

Disclaimer: IANAL.

From MongoDB, Inc's POV, its fine to run MongoDB in-house for the purposes of supporting some user-facing application. Coinbase would be a good example, they make a consumer product that uses MongoDB as the storage backend.

What is definitely not allowed is selling fully hosted MongoDB instances. E.g. (https://cloud.yandex.ru/docs/mdb/). To do this you will need to open-source all the supporting infra/automation code which will be a deal breaker in many cases.

The real grey area is a service like Parse or Firebase that is built on Mongo but offers a Mongo-like DBaaS. Is it against the SSPL to build a service like that? Or is MongoDB, Inc trying to force everyone to use its MongoDB Stitch service [0]?

[0] - https://www.mongodb.com/cloud/stitch

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#28

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

ReverseCold wrote: post #8

I used to like permissive (OSI) licenses a lot more than restrictive licenses, but now I like copyleft better (for my own projects) because… 1. You’re still helping education, nonprofits, and individuals benefit from your work. 2. It’s still open source, so people will still be able to contribute and use your work in their own projects. 3. Companies that want to use your code to make money can do so, but only if they…

I really like WTFPL as a permissive licence in these cases.

Small developers and companies without layers of lawyers will read the licence, see that it says "do what the ---- you want", and use your code accordingly.

Big companies with layers of lawyers will read the licence, blanch in terror, and either refuse to use the software, or contact you for alternative terms.

Case in point: Google forbids use of the WTFPL. https://opensource.google.com/docs/thirdparty/licenses/#wtfp...

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#29

Post by DannyBee »

vslira wrote: post #18

I'm not an expert in licenses, could someone weight in and explain how the AGPLv3 was being abused? Did the mentioned companies follow the spirit of the license and were getting away with something the company didn't like or were they just improperly distributing the software, regardless of licensing terms? Also: "So while the SSPL isn’t all that different from the GNU GPLv3,(...) [it] explicitly states that anybody…

Speaking as a lawyer:

There was no abuse, there was only mongo not being able to make money in all cases they wanted to. That's what they see as abuse. It isn't.

While they complain of bad actors, bad actors always act bad. This will not disincentivize them (they are also often in a lot of interesting jurisdictions that would make it hard anyway).

Instead, this is really about making it completely unpalatable for normal actors to not pay mongo in every single case.

Otherwise, one has to believe that mongo is going to go off and sue a bunch of people now, which would be a horribly stupid business model.

Re: MongoDB switches up its open source license

#30

Post by oropolo »

I might be reading this wrong, but doesn't this qualify as a "super viral" license in that any code that in any way is part of the stack for hosting Mongo as a Service must be open sourced as well? Granted, a company could buy a commercial license to avoid this but if (for the sake of example) Azure's Mongo hosting was using the open source license would this mean that EVERYTHING that goes into Azure, down to Windows "Redstone" source code, would need to be released?
Post reply on HN