Hi Marten Thank you, but I think it is important not to mix up the limitations and obligations enforced by the license with ethic or practical concerns like the lack of support.
I was under the impression that this list was monitored by MySQL people with knowledge of marketing and licensing too. It is frustrating that these licensing questions pop up again and again because no one seems to be able to list some clear and practical examples on where and where not a commercial license is mandatory and why. The question of MS Access is good; despite the fact that it is a wonderful development tool, it is promoted and sold as a user's tool which can access external databases in much the same way as Excel. The user of Access or Excel doesn't need to develop an "application" to benefit from a powerful external engine like MaxDB. I'm not a lawyer neither interested in close reading of multiple pages of boring license agreements. I don't make money from that, MySQL does, thus it is about time that MySQL gets this mess cleared out in a way that is completely clear as well as comprehensible and useful for developers and their bosses; words like "proper solution", "recommended" and "encourage" are of no use here. This must include listing of the pros and cons and consequences for the typical scenarios. Then, leaving the guessing, you could easily select which road to follow knowing that the chosen route was certified by MySQL and a lawyer's interpretation of the written license. /gustav > Date: 2004-01-25 16:13 > Ok, I only can tell you, how MySQL in Germany seems to interpret > their own license and I'm not sure if they know for sure how to > interpret in any ways. > >>From: Gustav Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Hi Marten > >>Isn't this interpretation oversimplified? If so, a user with, say, > >>Microsoft Access could not connect to a non-commercial MaxDB engine > >>even in-house. Is that so? > Actually a programm under Access is not Access itselfs, but the > program, reports etc you create with Access. And yes you need > a commercial license for that. > Look at the following part of MySQL license sentence: > >For OEM's, ISVs, corporate, and government users, a commercial license > >is the proper solution because it provides you with assurance from the > >vendor and releases you from the strict requirements of the GPL license. > You are a corporate user (in-house !) therefore you need a commercial > license. If nobody knows, that you have a solution with then of > course nobody cares. But your code is actually GPLed then - but as > I said: if nobody knows your code .... but ask yourself, what your > employer will say to a situation like this ... > >>From: Henrik Hempelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Subject: Re: License of MaxDB > >> >>This is also true for WWW services. > >>no, this is wrong. > >>You only need a license from MySQL if you are distributing your non-GPL > >>software. You need no license for inhouse usage, web services or GPLed > >>software distribution. > Henrik, I think, that the license model of MySQL is the most unknown > model in the world, because so many users interpret it in a different > way. Look at this sentence > "So if you use MySQL with GPL-licensed software (or a license that is > GPL-compatible) we encourage you to use the GPL license. For all other > users of MySQL, we recommend that you purchase a MySQL commercial license" > Now Henrik: what is your www-service? It's some part of software, which > creates this WWW-service. I also thought, that MySQL mentioned an > exception for Internet-Providers, but with the license version dated > 01/2004 I can not find it anymore. There's an exception with PHP. > Therfore it's pretty simple: If anyone get the information, that you > have written a very nice WWW application using MySQL I would encourage > you to get a commercial license .... > Therefore my simplification is pretty good ..... > Marten -- MaxDB Discussion Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/maxdb To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
