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

Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 140 posts

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#131

Post by kemitchell »

avar wrote: post #79

I wish Redis and its ecosystem was 100% open source, but I also wish for a pony. I applaud Redis Labs for not being one of the companies (such as MongoDB) that appears to be intentionally trying to muddy the waters by blurring the distinction between open source and proprietary software.

> intentionally trying to muddy the waters by blurring the distinction between open source and proprietary software

Consider this quote from RMS, in Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism:

> I make my code available for use in free software, and not for use in proprietary software, in order to encourage other people who write software to make it free as well. I figure that since proprietary software developers use copyright to stop us from sharing, we cooperators can use copyright to give other cooperators an advantage of their own: they can use our code.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.en.html

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#132

Post by kemitchell »

flurdy wrote: post #101

Think we need a standardised AGPL-like license that includes API as well as code. (Cue Oracle v Google ) There may be several in existence already? To prevent AWS and its ilk duplicating features of other's products but not really run (or pretending to not...) their software underneath. I also hoped Morsi's tweaks to AGPL, the Lesser Affero GPLv3, would have become more popular. [1] http://mo.morsi.org/blog/2009/08/1…

I'd love more feedback on this license:

https://github.com/kemitchell/api-copyleft-license/blob/mast...

It's written in everyday English. We've already had some great feedback from interested hackers.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#133

Post by kemitchell »

jarym wrote: post #77

I’m beginning to think the coolness of open sourcing stuff is wearing off a bit. If it is core tech to a business then why bother? Lots of cool projects don’t really get that many contributors. No point getting a community hooked on your software if you have to give it away and hope they’ll one day buy some services so you get paid. All in all I foresee it becoming easier that source is kept closed for all things non…

F/OSS' counterculture days are over. They are the culture.

Consider: https://opensource.org/sponsors

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#134

Post by flurdy »

kemitchell wrote: post #132
flurdy wrote: post #101

Think we need a standardised AGPL-like license that includes API as well as code. (Cue Oracle v Google ) There may be several in existence already? To prevent AWS and its ilk duplicating features of other's products but not really run (or pretending to not...) their software underneath. I also hoped Morsi's tweaks to AGPL, the Lesser Affero GPLv3, would have become more popular. [1] http://mo.morsi.org/blog/2009/08/1…

I'd love more feedback on this license: https://github.com/kemitchell/api-copyleft-license/blob/mast... It's written in everyday English. We've already had some great feedback from interested hackers.

This looks very good to me. I do not speak legalese but it seems to me to cover the API clauses I was looking for.

I may be using this license for some projects going forward. :)

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#135

Post by kemitchell »

flurdy wrote: post #134
kemitchell wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love more feedback on this license: https://github.com/kemitchell/api-copyleft-license/blob/mast... It's written in everyday English. We've already had some great feedback from interested hackers.

This looks very good to me. I do not speak legalese but it seems to me to cover the API clauses I was looking for. I may be using this license for some projects going forward. :)

I am about to release a version 1.0.0. I'd strongly suggest you watch releases on GitHub.

I'd also appreciate a note on GitHub about any projects using the license. Eventually, I'd like to add a list to the repo.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#136

Post by michaelmrose »

anth_anm wrote: post #122
michaelmrose wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Rubs me the wrong way when these same companies can just re implement the API and cause massive hurt to an open source competitor. What do you propose in that scenario. Copyrighting api has never been a thing prior and likely wont be as soon as the whole affair is appealed yet again. Why should you be able to control who makes a compatible part? Do you want your car company maximizing revenue by not allowing you to…

> Do you want your car company maximizing revenue by not allowing you to buy anything but new parts of their manufacture installed by their techs? DRM for machinery is absolutely already a thing. What about shifting open source licenses so that duplicating an open source API in a proprietary product, or using a product that does so, is a violation of the license agreement?

You have to be party to such a license in the first place do you expect anyone to be stupid enough to sign up for that bullshit?

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#138

Post by dcbadacd »

gdwatson wrote: post #45
dcbadacd wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's still open-source, it's just not free (as in freedom) software. I'm annoyed how suddenly redis, even when source is available, is put into the same bin as say MSSQL, with rest of the "proprietary software".

The usual definition of open source is the Open Source Definition,[1] which was adapted from the Debian Free Software Guidelines[2]. The sixth item prohibits discrimination against fields of endeavor, which this new license would violate. It's more like an especially generous version of shared source than open source. [1] https://opensource.org/osd [2] https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines

I do not agree that some organization can define what open source is and everyone else can't. That's not free.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#139

Post by dcbadacd »

geofft wrote: post #99
dcbadacd wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's still open-source, it's just not free (as in freedom) software. I'm annoyed how suddenly redis, even when source is available, is put into the same bin as say MSSQL, with rest of the "proprietary software".

You can ask Microsoft for access to Windows source code. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/ Any definition of "open source" that includes Windows is so vague as to be useless.

But that's asking, it's closed until "opened", not "open" per se.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#140

Post by nybble41 »

e12e wrote: post #69
ezrast wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Out of curiosity would the GPLv3 at least force providers like Amazon to release any modifications they make to FOSS stuff to turn it into a hosted/managed service? With things like Apache/BSD/MIT, does AWS currently mod stuff without releasing the results as FOSS? (Is Aurora DB really modified MySql or MariaDB under its core?) Aurora is absolutely a fork of MySQL; they're careful never to explicitly admit this in…

Good points. But regarding: > This is not true of the AGPL, which has additional redistribution requirements meant to prevent (what copyleft activists perceive as) this kind of abuse. It's important to note that the "kind of abuse" AGPL is fighting is denying the end user the four freedoms. Eg freedom zero: if Amazon shuts down aurora, you lose the right to run the program. Upstreaming of modifications is kind of ort…

> It's important to note that the "kind of abuse" AGPL is fighting is denying the end user the four freedoms.

But which end user would that be? The end user of the licensed program is Amazon. They're the ones running the program and using it to provide database services to their customers. Those customers are end users of Amazon's database services, not a particular piece of software.

Post reply on HN