Aye, sounds like it's a good time to develop another memcached replacement.

Tip: if your memcached replacement doesn't trivially allow the rooting of its server, and if you don't also defiantly leave the exploit in while explaining that "you must be --- this tall --- to use redis without it behaving like a malware installation", and that any dirty normies deserve that fate, then you're already better than redis! :)

Ain’t nothing wrong with memcached itself.

It'd be much better if they asked people who understand business of open source on how to drive more $.

For example: it could as well be: "If you're any of: FB, APPL, MS, .... and you use this software in your cloud, you owe us $2M/yr"

It'd be much easier to analyze the impact.

that would be discrimination and that's would also make it a non open source license

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

https://opensource.org/osd-annotated

The freedom definition doesn't have such a requirement though. Sometimes it allows to prohibit some usages, e.g. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#OpinionLicens...

I don't think Morgan Stanley is about to sell Redis hosting, but what do I know.