Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Oracle

Oracle Quietly Switches BerkeleyDB To AGPL 219

WebMink writes "A discussion in the Debian community reveals that last month Oracle quietly disclosed a change for the embedded BerkeleyDB database from the quirky Sleepycat License to the Affero General Public License (AGPL) in future versions. AGPL is only compatible with GPLv3 and treats web deployment as a trigger to license compliance, so developers using BerkeleyDB will need to check their code is still legally licensed. Even if they had made the switch in the interests of advancing software freedom it would be questionable to force so many developers into a new license compatibility crisis. But it seems likely their only motivation is to scare more people into buying proprietary licenses. Oracle are well within their rights, but developers are likely to treat this as a betrayal. As a poster in the Debian thread says, "Oracle move just sent the Berkeley DB to oblivion" because there are some great alternatives, like OpenLDAP's LMDB."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle Quietly Switches BerkeleyDB To AGPL

Comments Filter:
  • Re:lol (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 05, 2013 @02:05PM (#44196541)

    Not true, it has good use in webapplications. Think about something like phpbb where they want to release full code for it, but don't want people to modify it even if "only for their server".

  • Re:lol (Score:4, Interesting)

    by harlows_monkeys ( 106428 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @04:22PM (#44198167) Homepage

    The FSF has a definition [gnu.org] of the term "free software".

    Software under AGPL is not not free software according to that definition. It violates freedom 0.

    Yet the FSF approved AGPL! This was an ethical disaster.

    A key difference between free software licenses and commercial software EULAs was that the latter was a two way bargain. The copyright owner, who the law gives the exclusive right to make copies (including, for computer software, making temporary copies in RAM to use the software) grants you via the EULA permission to do that, in exchange for you agreeing not to do some things that otherwise would be allowed under copyright law. For example, you might have to agree to not reverse engineer the software, or to sell it when you are done with it.

    The free software licenses, on the other hand, only grant you permissions. They do not require you to give up anything.

    Until AGPL. AGPL goes beyond just granting you permission to do things that copyright law says require permission. It places restrictions on what you do with the software on your own machine. It is a EULA.

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...