Possibly this time wasting business is as a quid pro quo for oracle wasting time in filing the paperwork in the EU. Which I read, in a blog or newspaper website that struck me as reasonably trustworthy at the time, but I can't find the link anymore :(
As far as I can remember, all the publicly published EU communication has always either mentioned MySQL by name or was about 'the db market', which is probably intended to mean the same thing. On Nov 11, 9:09 pm, Fabrizio Giudici <[email protected]> wrote: > Reinier Zwitserloot wrote: > > (2) MySQL is the european FOSS db, and it basically got hijacked. > > That's possibly unfortunate but utterly irrelevant to greenlighting a > > merger, though it may > > explain further why the EU originally chose to do extra research on > > this one - sentimental reasons are used all the time in politics. > > This article > > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/technology/companies/11oracle.html?... > > confirms your point about MySQL concerns specifically to UE > institutions. It's likely that governments and similar entities that > have learned how not to pay license fees to M$ and IBM are probably > scared at the idea of paying again, this time to Oracle. This is not > unreasonable at all. But it's legitimate to raise another question: > whether the EU commission is only caring of the concerns of public > entities interested in the LAMP stack, and is not considering the > concern of the rest of the people worried about the other set of > technologies that are posed at risk by these delays. > > But there's another interesting point in the article: > > "After the acquisition plan was announced in April, the investigation by > both sets of regulators focused mainly on Java, a widely used > programming language and Internet technology created by Sun, according > to a person close to Oracle, who asked not to be named because he was > not authorized to speak for the company. > > By August, the person said, the focus of Europe’s investigation had > switched to MySQL, which took Oracle somewhat by surprise. The European > authorities asked Oracle to divest MySQL, and Oracle resisted" > > So, it sounds as the story about Oracle providing documents to the EU in > delay is not relevant. The EU concerns about MySQL should have been > obvious since April and for sure they have to be blamed for the fact > that they wasted four months. > > -- > Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager > Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." > weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici -www.tidalwave.it/people > [email protected] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
