6930126
story
Comments: 334 +- Developers: EC Formally Objects To Oracle's Purchase of Sun on Tuesday November 10, @04:26PM
Posted
by
kdawson
on Tuesday November 10, @04:26PM
from the bringing-about-the-most-feared-outcome dept.
from the bringing-about-the-most-feared-outcome dept.
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicdatabases.gif); width:108px; height:63px;
database
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicoracle.png); width:97px; height:19px;
oracle
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicsun.gif); width:56px; height:56px;
sun
eldavojohn writes "The EC has presented Oracle and Sun with a statement of objections. Despite the promotion of former MySQL CEO Marten Mickos, the statement seems to focus entirely on
what many have feared: MySQL vs. Oracle databases. From Sun's 8-K SEC filing: 'The Statement of Objections sets out the Commission's preliminary assessment regarding, and is limited to, the combination of Sun's open source MySQL database product with Oracle's enterprise database products and its potential negative effects on competition in the
market for database products.' The EU and the EC are getting a rep for disagreeing with US counterparts." On Monday afternoon the DoJ reiterated its support for the deal. Matthew Aslett has a helpful timeline of the action from the EC.
Related Stories
Executive ability is prominent in your make-up.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.
I Object! (Score:5, Funny)
What is the EC?? (Score:2, Informative)
The European Commission (formally the Commission of the European Communities) acts as an executive of the European Union. The body is responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the Union's treaties and the general day-to-day running of the Union.
EC objects? (Score:2, Funny)
What do DC and Marvel think?
Why does Oracle need MySQL anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
I seriously don't see why Oracle needs MySQL.
Re:Why does Oracle need MySQL anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
I seriously don't see why Oracle needs MySQL.
Frankly, Ellisons refusal to spin it off is the strongest indication that the purpose of acquiring MySQL as part of the deal is anti-competitive. As you say, it's not as if Oracle really needs it, so it shouldn't be this much of an issue.
Parent
Re:Why does Oracle need MySQL anyway? (Score:4, Insightful)
I seriously don't see why Oracle needs MySQL.
Product mix - as the marketing guys call it. MySQL has a market that Oracle doesn't. How many folks use Oracle as their back end for their websites? Now they have products that cover more of the market for RDMSs; which I believe, makes them the leader, but by no means able to control the market as the EC fears.
Parent
Oracle's reasons *are* monopolistic! (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's see...MySQL brings in ~50M a year, Sun is losing 100M a month. Makes no sense why Oracle would want to delay, except for monopolistic reasons.
Re:Oracle's reasons *are* monopolistic! (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see...MySQL brings in ~50M a year, Sun is losing 100M a month. Makes no sense why Oracle would want to delay, except for monopolistic reasons.
Last I heard, Oracle doesn't want to delay. It's the European Commission that wants to delay Oracle.
As for "monopolistic reasons": Between IBM, Microsoft, Teradata, PostgreSQL, etc, how can Oracle possibly be said to have a monopoly on databases?
You seem to be suggesting that Oracle wants to destroy the market for MySQL. As the largest database vendor in the world, how does it benefit Oracle to destroy any market for databases, however large or small?
And that's assuming it's even possible for Oracle to do what you suggest. Even if the goal is merely to destroy the market for low-cost databases, I don't see how Oracle could do that. There is no shortage of low-cost (free) alternatives to MySQL -- PostgreSQL, Firebird, SQLite, the list goes on.
If Oracle doesn't immediately cave in to the European Commission, have you considered the possibility that it might be because Oracle plans to grow the MySQL market, and that even at $100 million/month, it has not yet sacrificed enough profit to make up for all the money it plans to make from MySQL in the coming years?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As for "monopolistic reasons": Between IBM, Microsoft, Teradata, PostgreSQL, etc, how can Oracle possibly be said to have a monopoly on databases?
The job of the EC anti-trust commission is to prevent monopolies before they happen, not punish them when they do (the way the Sherman act works in the US). So their fear is not that Oracle would be a monopoly, but that it comes too close to being able to corner the market. You don't need a monopoly for that, just a commanding influence.
I disagree (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I disagree (Score:4, Interesting)
But MySQL is low end. It's about as low end as you can go without using MS Access.
Is it a shot against it if what you're saying is true?
Parent
Re:I disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
I think Oracle's target market are the web 2.0 cowboys who originally went with MySQL, grew up and realized they needed something more robust, and are currently tied to MySQL because those other alternatives would break their extremely MySQL-specific code. If Oracle can provide a flawless backwards compatibility layer for MySQL, they'd have an edge over the other guys.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What about the Berkeley DB they bought? They'll just need postgresql and sqlite next.
And how would Oracle "buy" either of those? And why? PostgreSQL is BSD-licensed and SQLite is public domain. Oracle is free to start selling its own version of either package tomorrow, if it felt like it.
Is company health considered? (Score:4, Interesting)
As I remember it (and I could be remembering it wrong), Sirrus and XM were allowed to merge because the likelihood of both companies continuing without a merger were essentially nil.
Would the EU perform a similar analysis on Sun and figure that, given its situation, the option is either merge with Oracle or go bankrupt, in which case the situation is, conceptually, the same because either way Sun ceases to be a player. Or do they not consider this and simply line up the bullet points, see too much overlap, say no to the merger (which is not the same as an objection, I realize), and just hope that Sun can pull it together by itself?
Re: (Score:2)
As I remember it (and I could be remembering it wrong), Sirrus and XM were allowed to merge because the likelihood of both companies continuing without a merger were essentially nil.
Neither Sirius nor XM could merge while spinning off one of their satellite radio operations into a new company, to maintain a "semi-free market" or a "free-er market".
It would be trivial to sell off mysql. Heck, give it away. Sell it to the FSF for $1?
Re:Is company health considered? (Score:4, Interesting)
the option is either merge with Oracle or go bankrupt
If Sun goes into reorganization or liquidation assets like MySQL would probably be sold off and Oracle would likely be blocked as a buyer of MySQL, so the EC's main objection would be resolved in an acceptable fashion either way. The purpose of government in a competitive free market should be exactly that; prevent anticompetitive behaviour and structures, not support failing companies.
Parent
Not sure I get the EC ruling (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And Europe can let get in their say.... (Score:4, Insightful)
IBM may be doing what they can to stir the pot on this. With each delay, Sun's survival is more in question, and more business can be sucked away from Sun by IBM.
The objection (that Oracle will have "control" of an Open Source product like MySQL) is absolutely absurd. First of all, there is nothing Oracle can do to prevent others from continuing to update and support MySQL under GPL. Many Open Source projects continue under GPL. MySQL has a huge "out of Oracle's reach" GPL effort already.
Secondly, the database market is dynamic with many new competitors entering the field. MySQL as a relational database faces competition from a host of nonSQL databases whose performance and capacity relational databases cannot match.
The real problem with the merger is politics for profit and spite. Heaven forbid the EU allows two American companies to merge. The EU likes to keep their own mergers to a minimum .... like with Airbus?
A Rep? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why should the US be able to decide what is good for Europe and its consumers? Sun and Oracle have the choice of no longer doing business in Europe at which point the EC won't have anything to do with their merger!
US regulations suck for consumers, whereas the EC attempts to work for the consumer. That is the reason for the difference, and whether you like it or not that is how it will continue to be done as multi-nationals can't just stop selling in the EU or the US just because one of them is more favoura
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Informative)
The EC is.. who now?
EC is European Commission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EC [wikipedia.org]
Effectively, it's the EU.
Population of EU is about 500 million vs. 308 million for the USA, so the EC is kinda significant.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the current european-american exchange rate is about 1 to 1.5, so you should count each of us as 1.5 person.
(no seriousness intended)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
They have socialized healthcare, i.e. euthanasia committees, so by next week they'll all be dead.
Stephen Hawking might escape, if his wheelchar can make it to the US embassy (free sovereign soil! NUMBER ONE!) in time.
Re:Okay... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Since when did the Oracle move from Athens?!?! (Score:2, Insightful)
Mod parent up, I'm tired of the /. eds assuming i know what every god damned acronym means. (Sure I can google it, but usually I just move on)
That's assuming you get right definition of "EC". Everyone here seems to assume that googling things will give you the correct or relevant answer.
For example, I googled it and E. Coli doesn't want Oracle in Athens to predict what Apollo will say.
So there!, "why don't you google it" Nazis!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If I posted this about the acronym "US" you can be damn sure I would mbe modded troll in a heartbeat.
And they are?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They didn't post EU. If I posted NGA would you automatically know what I was talking about?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If I posted NGA would you automatically know what I was talking about?
That's completely offensive. I'll have you know my ex girlfriend is black. CRKR.
...but, to answer your question: no.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"...not specifically American nerds."
Are you sure?
http://slashdot.org/faq/editorial.shtml#ed850 [slashdot.org]
"Slashdot is U.S.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Americans"
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:F the EC (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually they're multinational companies, and Oracle stands to lose a fair chunk of change if they can't do business in EU countries. Not that I agree with this retarded group's findings. The whole "Can't sustain development without being able to sell proprietary licenses" is bunk. Plenty of opensource projects thrive without being able to sell proprietary licenses. Linux springs to mind.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Both Oracle almost certainly have EU-based subsidiary companies in various European countries, so I imagine they could - at the very least - block the merger of those.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They can and will fine them, just like they fined Microsoft and Intel. You don't pay? Get fined again. Still don't want to pay? Do your business elsewhere and say bye bye to the biggest market in the world.
If you want to make business within the EU abide you will have to abide to the rules.
Re: (Score:2)
I hear they like to sell their stuff in the EU, so maybe they should care.
They could not threaten the EU, for fear it would declare their copyrights null and void.
You seem to have a pretty messed up sense of how the world works.
Re: (Score:2)
Both Oracle and Sun do an enormous amount of business in Europe and as such I expect they operate locale offices or divisions that exist as entities subject to European law.
Similarly US subsidiaries of organizations such as Siemens who are primarily European are subject to US law. (And why it was legal for Cuba to nationalize all those companies way beck when, their ball, their rules.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, right. Oracle is letting one of it's largest markets fall just so they don't have to sell MySQL.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, what can the EC do about it?
Forbid them from selling their stuff in the EU. Somewhere between a quarter and a third of Oracles income comes from the EU. That is a significant amount of money they cannot afford to lose.
Re:F the EC (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, standing up to badly behaved American companies.
Try some research before you post nationalistic crap like that. The EC has fined european companies in the billions range for violations of anti-corruption laws, does the same anti-trust checks on european companies and so on.
Wake up. 50 years ago, the US had the moral high ground on the rest of the world, but you can't go downhill forever without losing it.
Parent
Re:F the EC (Score:4, Insightful)
Moral high ground? Would that be after stooping to the level of the USSR in playing third-world countries like pawns -- the CIA coups in Iran or Guatemala in the early fifties? After backstabbing her allies at Suez a few years later? Or after encouraging the Hungarians that same year? Or were you thinking back to the World War -- and the wonderful economic timing of joining it two years late, when her last ally was finally bankrupt?
Come to think of it, I can't remember any instance where the US had the moral high ground since its revolution. Sure, if you compare it to the Soviet Union, it had the moral high ground, but that's not much of a comparison, is it?
This isn't a dig at the US, it's a decent country. But far too much of its propaganda is still believed, probably because it's top nation.
Parent
Re:Good Business (Score:5, Insightful)
If you think MySQL is any threat to Oracle, then you don't understand anything about the commercial database market.
Parent
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Good Business (Score:4, Informative)
"Some hardware engineering but that SPARC stuff really isn't competitive."
Really?
How much do you know about "that SPARC stuff?" It's true that x86 has finally surpassed a lot of the things that Sparc led the way in, but there are still ways that traditional Sparc scales better.
Now moving to the next generation of Sun's gear, we have hardware virtualisation and CoolThreads. Under a hundred grand will buy you a system with four 8-core CPUs, and each core can process eight simultaneous threads. That is OLTP nirvana! Too much power? Chop it up into a handful of smaller servers, each running their own OS. Any one of them can in turn be split into zones--soft OS partitions.
I keep hearing about how Sparc is obsolete, and yet the new generation of Sparc processors and supporting hardware is pushing the state of the art that Intel and AMD aren't even planning in yet.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Some hardware engineering but that SPARC stuff really isn't competitive."
Really?
How much do you know about "that SPARC stuff?" It's true that x86 has finally surpassed a lot of the things that Sparc led the way in, but there are still ways that traditional Sparc scales better.
Now moving to the next generation of Sun's gear, we have hardware virtualisation and CoolThreads. Under a hundred grand will buy you a system with four 8-core CPUs, and each core can process eight simultaneous threads. That is OLTP nirvana! Too much power? Chop it up into a handful of smaller servers, each running their own OS. Any one of them can in turn be split into zones--soft OS partitions.
I keep hearing about how Sparc is obsolete, and yet the new generation of Sparc processors and supporting hardware is pushing the state of the art that Intel and AMD aren't even planning in yet.
Umm... what?
First of all, for "a hundred grand", I can buy 10 systems that add up to 80 Intel 3Ghz cores (160 threads) with 720GB of memory, which is going to shit all over that SUN box with its anemic 1Ghz processors. That's retail pricing, in Aussie dollars! Including tax! Delivered to your door in under a week, assembled!
Meanwhile, to get that SUN box, I'd have to "call your nearest SUN dealer". Oh good, I can't wait to have him explain to me how spending $100K is going to "save me money", or something.
I
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Although these companies are primarily based in the US they have some fairly substantial operations in the EU. I don't imagine that they like the idea of moving those, especially if it involves moving them further from a market that they're trying to sell into. Europe probably would miss Oracle and MySQL but Oracle-Sun would probably miss having a presence in an enormous market and would not welcome the costs of moving parts of their operation into the US or to other places outside the EU.
When they entere