Re:Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
by cycloptic on Tuesday January 19, 2021 @08:33PM
(#25841502)
No offense but this advice is rather risky and legally dangerous, please don't tell people to potentially put their products in jeopardy by doing this. The correct thing to do is for MongoDB/Elastic to just clarify the wording in the license.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
by woofie11 on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @05:19AM
(#25844656)
No. The correct thing is to adopt a license I understand.
AGPL is okay.
I'm not hiring a lawyer when I'm selecting a few tools to benchmark. I'm not using EC until I've had the license reviewed by a lawyer. Ergo, redis or similar.
Re:Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
by cycloptic on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @09:23AM
(#25846737)
If the license is so badly worded that nobody can understand it, it needs to be corrected. I agree you should not hire a lawyer for that, it's not your lawyer's job to fix some other company's license for them. It's a shame that MongoDB appears to have completely lost interest in drafting SSPLv2.
Re:Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
by aries185 on Monday February 01, 2021 @01:52AM
(#25986284)
Redis is still FOSS under the BSD license. If Redis Labs were to change the Redis license, AWS would fork it in a heartbeat. To help clear up confusion you can read about the Redis, Redis Modules and Redis Enterprise licenses here: https://redislabs.com/legal/licenses/