Hi all, After listening to the episode 10 of Les Cast Codeurs (java podcast in french) I read the referenced blog post from Sacha Labourey regarding dual licensing issues and the way it could be a problem for MySQL under Oracle flag.
http://sacha.labourey.com/2009/10/25/sun-vs-and-orcl-the-failure-of-the-dual-licensing-model/ Maybe the EU understands exactly this possible licensing issue and this is one of the reasons for the questions regarding the deal completion. It gives a least a view point that I never saw expressed anywhere else yet. Regards, Louis On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Fabrizio Giudici < [email protected]> wrote: > > Reinier Zwitserloot wrote: > > So, the fact that the US rubberstamped this deal means the EU is > > somehow at fault for doing some more thorough research before giving > > the green light? > > > > I reiterate what I've been saying in other threads as well: Trusting > > US financial decisions has cost the EU a couple trillion. Expecting > > them to blindly follow suit is ludicrous. > > > Unfortunately the discussion hasn't moved from a mere trust attribution > on the US / EU politics. I only re-state my point: the EU is not forced > to rubberstamp US decisions, but: > > 1. As I said, since 2001 this is only the second time the two boards > have different views. > 2. Since there are many decisions per year, the Sun/Oracle deal is also > the only disagreement point after the financial crisis (just in case it > was a relevant point, which I don't agree, but it's another story). If > you call that rubberstamping, well it sounds that it goes and will go > on, with the only exception of Oracle. > 3. The EU has got to explain *why* their vision is different. So far > I've only read that there are concerns, but as a citizen who pays taxes > I want to see a clear explanation of their concerns, and why they think > they disagree with US. I don't know if the lack of this information is > due to EU or to newspaper, but it's a fault by somebody. For instance, > there's a new communication by the DoJ that - among other things - says > that they're not concerned also because MySQL is not the only FLOSS > database (in fact there's at least Postgres). Now I'd like to see EU > explaining why they don't think it's enough. > > > -- > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
