On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:37:05AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote: > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:40:41AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 08:19:35AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > > I'm fairly sure that I'm right. But my point isn't that we should "trust > > > Andres implicitly ™" (although that's obviously not a bad starting point > > > ;)). But rather, given that that is a reasonable assumption that such > > > agreements are legally possible, we can decide whether we want to take > > > advantage of such terms *assuming they are legally sound*. Then, if, and > > > only if, we decide that that's interesting from a policy POV, we can > > > verify those assumptions with lawyers. > > > > > > > > Given we're far from the first project dealing with this, and that > > > companies that have shown themselves to be reasonably trustworthy around > > > open source, like Red Hat, assuming that such agreements are sound seems > > > quite reasonable. > > > > Sun Microsystems seemed reasonably trustworthy too. > > Are there patent grants from Sun that Oracle has attempted to renege on? > Are there court cases about that? Links?
No, but I bet there are things Oracle is doing that no one at Sun expected to be done, and users who relied on Sun didn't expect to be done. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +