On Mit, 2004-10-27 at 11:35 -0400, Scot L. Harris wrote:
> That is the way I read it. At one point it even appeared that in a
> corporate situation they wanted a commercial license for applications
> that were used internally only. Worded along the lines of if you have
> any doubts you better buy a license.
What's wrong with this? Surely they want everyone who can afford it to
buy a license. They make a living and fund the development from selling
licenses and support!
> I have found postgresql to be an excellent replacement with no questions
> about licensing issues.
And best of all, any $$$ company can take all or part of the postgresql
source code and sell it as or with their products. In the long run they
will add their own patented extensions and leave open source one step
behind.
I do not want this and I doubt you do. Therefore I refuse to contribute,
endorse or even use software projects allowing this type of intellectual
property theft.
Tom
--
T h o m a s Z e h e t b a u e r ( TZ251 )
PGP encrypted mail preferred - KeyID 96FFCB89
finger thomasz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx for key
If there is a god, he has just the better marketing...
because if he does something bad everyone says:
'the pathways of the lord are fathomless'
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
