Crying fake news (which has been co-opted to mean "real news that I don't like or that you shouldn't pay attention to") completely undermined your statement. Yes, the original announcement wasn't just unclear, it is very clearly drawing a line that "this must be changed".
> Redis’ permissive BSD open source license allows them to do so legally, but this must be changed
It sounds a bit different when not taken out of context:
> Redis is an example of this paradigm. Today, most cloud providers offer Redis as a managed service over their infrastructure and enjoy huge income from software that was not developed by them. Redis’ permissive BSD open source license allows them to do so legally, but this must be changed. Redis Labs is leading and financing the development of open source Redis and deserves to enjoy the fruits of these efforts. Consequently, we decided to add Commons Clause to certain components of open source Redis. Cloud providers will no longer be able to use these components as part of their Redis-as-a-Service offerings, but all other users will be unaffected by this change.
While this is being portrayed as a communication error, that strains belief—it sounds a lot more like an after-the-fact effort to deal with massive blowback at the very clearly stated intent.
But yeah, blame lazy journalists.
You realize that antirez (Salvatore Sanfilippo) lives in Italy, speaks English as a second language, and isn't exposed to the US political climate, right? Crucifying him for the US-coloquial subtextual connotation of his word choice is pretty uncharitable.
It remains that the official statement from the company has incredibly misleading wording, so it seems suspect to attack people who might "misinterpret" that, though. Uncharitable, even.
The original one was news that's completely made up without reference facts. This term was created to describe sites that generate fictional news stories to support an agenda or get clicks.
The second one is news that is negative about you. This usage was created as a deflection from the actual problem of fiction being sold as fact, and has become the primary usage. It is an attack on news not for whether it's correct, but for how it makes you look.
Neither of these apply to an honest miscommunication, and they both describe the people who misunderstood the announcement as malicious enemies rather than the concerned fans of Redis they more likely are.
EDIT: antirez updated the post, so this is no longer relevant.
Eww. This actually removes credibility from the announcement, given the way the term "fake news" continues to be used to distract from objective truth.