Re: About GPL and proprietary software

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:43 PM
> To: Jan Wieck
> Cc: Kaarel; Christopher Browne; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org;
> Marten G Mickos
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] About GPL and proprietary software
>
>
> Jan Wieck wrote:
> > > "Your PHP app that requires MySQL, if distributed, will
> either have
> > > to be GPL (or another OSI-approved and MySQL-approved open source
> > > licence ) or you will need a commercial licence of MySQL."
>
> In this case, it is almost saying that if the application
> requires MySQL, it has to be commercial, even if you don't
> distribute MySQL and expect it to be part of the operating
> system --- again, reach as far with the GPL as we can.
>
> > > Sometimes people say "But I cannot open source my
> application!" and
> > > they may have valid reasons for this. Our response is
> then: "If you
> > > have a valid reason not to be open source, wouldn't that same
> > > reasoning apply to us?".
> > >
> > > This goes to the core of MySQL AB's business idea of Quid
> pro Quo -
> > > if you are open source, we are open source - if you are closed
> > > source, we are commercial.
>
> This is call cute sounding, but to be fair, it is easy for a
> tool company to promote GPL because you have revenue options
> by distributing non-GPL versions, while application writers
> do not have many revenue options for non-GPL versions.
>
> I don't want to sound too harsh. MySQL is trying to make
> money, and that is great. PostgreSQL tries to help all
> companies make more money.
>
> What bothers me is the shading of the truth that MySQL is a
> company that develops all code in-house, and uses the GPL as
> a way to gain market share and the threat of GPL as a way to
> gain revenue. I think 1% of MySQL users understand that,
> though I think that number is increasing with the new MySQL
> 4.0 GPL library licensing. I guess it bothers me that MySQL
> AB has been so successful at obscuring that fact.

This is what I find odd about GPL software:
{an illustration}
A man named George opens a spoon factory. People flock to his shop to
make spoons with no charge for their labor. You see, it is a company in
combat with the mighty "Oneida" which makes lots of spoons and people
could sure use some cheap, reliable spoons. If anyone uses these
spoons, then the knife, fork, plate and glass also now belong to George.
Strangely, George charges as much for these spoons (manufactured at no
cost to him) as Oneida.

Make the relevant substitutions in the above illustration with your
favorite GPL/Commercial enterprise.
Choose: Redhat Linux/Windows
Choose: MySQL/Oracle
Or any other such face-off.