In short, Amazon don't follow law of trademarks. Then, Elastic instead of enforcing their rights in court, changes license in hope that Amazon will follow law of copyright. How do they expect it will work? I don't get it.
Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
71–80 of 708 posts
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#72Elastic was an open source project, and now it's not. This was done because they believe it will be more profitable. It does affect you, especially if you contributed to the project, in which case they're basically spitting in your face as thanks for your hard work. This is not materially different from when Oracle infamously killed OpenSolaris, something they were rightfully crucified for by the community. They're n…
There’s still an oss license elasticsearch, they packed a lot of extra features to compete with Amazon distro and that bundle has a different license
I think you are mistaken and have missed the recent news which OP is about, but I'm not totally sure what you are talking about.
Which license do you consider an OSS licensed elasticsearch?
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#73Their license literally says they have the right to use this code as they're doing, shouldn't be mad at them for that. Imagine putting a sign on your lawn that says people can walk on your lawn and are even allowed to poop on it if they feel like it and then getting mad at them when they do so. That being said, I support their right to change their license to whatever they like if it helps them survive as a business…
The license for the main Elasticsearch is that, but they have some proprietary features (Machine Learning etc.) which are under a proprietary license. Amazon copied code from another project which had stolen this proprietary code from Elastic and resold it under their own banner. https://www.elastic.co/blog/dear-search-guard-users
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#74This is fine. No seriously. Hear me out. If you are a proponent of capitalism then this is how the system works. The little fish grow into big fish. The big fish eat the little fish. The ecosystem suffers. It has always been this way. Many of us remember Microsoft in the nineties. Fewer will remember the phone or oil industry doing the same. Don’t fight this issue. Fight the system that tolerates this pattern. Money…
Your examples from the past were all knocked down (MS) or broken apart to keep the market available to competitors. Are you saying we should do this or just get money out of politics?
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#75"And to be clear, this change most likely has zero effect on you, our users. It has no effect on our customers that engage with us either in cloud or on premises." No, that's just not true. So many users, from small hobby side-projects, to large open source projects, and mega-corps care about the licensing of dependencies, each for their own reason, and will not want to build on top of proprietary software that impos…
I find these kind of obscure, “don’t worry” posts to increase my worrying. Part of the simplicity of open source is that it’s available for easy audit. Having to hire lawyers to use a product means I probably won’t use it.
I also think having people saying “we’re open, but read the fine print” is not good for open source collaboration as it increases confusion and complexity.
Elastic is moving the way of a commercial software company. That’s perfectly fine as it’s their company, but it’s just different than open source.
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. I skimmed the linked article and saw only ranting. Maybe we can change the link to this post?
I read the whole linked article and was disappointed there was no explanation of the license changes they made - only justifications for the change.
I think the title covers that this is "why" the change occurred. Not the explanation of the license they changed to.
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#77I assume the trademark thing should be a slam dunk? That seems like the most blatant trademark violation ever.
Against the huge wallet of Amazon? Litigation isn't free. How much "justice" can Elastic afford?
On the other hand, as a result there are probably tens of millions to be made off a successful suit.
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#78"And to be clear, this change most likely has zero effect on you, our users. It has no effect on our customers that engage with us either in cloud or on premises." No, that's just not true. So many users, from small hobby side-projects, to large open source projects, and mega-corps care about the licensing of dependencies, each for their own reason, and will not want to build on top of proprietary software that impos…
Yep, it's also incompatible with virtually all copyleft open source licenses. So if you were using any AGPLv3 code with elastic you now have to switch to Amazon's fork.
Is incompatible with non-Affero GPL?
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're a paying customer, you are probably fine. If you're using SSPL'd Elastic (or Mongo DB, the risks are the same) for anything serious -- i.e. beyond a hobby, get legal advice ASAP. SSPL isn't an OSI certified license; many would call it at best a 'shared source' license because of the riders attached. [DELETED because, as user `gpm` points out, OSI doesn't own 'open source' as a trademark, sorry about that --…
OSI does not have a trademark on the term open source, they tried and failed to acquire one.
I think they need one.
Comically, this is why trademarks exist to prevent people from confusing the market with similar and reused terms.
I think we need a CreativeCommons-like trademark for open source software before it’s too late.
Re: Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
#80"And to be clear, this change most likely has zero effect on you, our users. It has no effect on our customers that engage with us either in cloud or on premises." No, that's just not true. So many users, from small hobby side-projects, to large open source projects, and mega-corps care about the licensing of dependencies, each for their own reason, and will not want to build on top of proprietary software that impos…
So what should we be using instead of elasticsearch for logs? To mitigate that licensing risk?