Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MySQL Changes License To Avoid GPLv3

Posted by kdawson on from the love-that-v2 dept.

munchola writes "MySQL has quietly changed the license it uses for its database to avoid being forced to move to the forthcoming GPLv3. CBRonline is reporting that Kaj Arno, MySQL VP of community relations, revealed the license change on his blog, noting it was made 'in order to make it an option, not an obligation for the company to move to GPLv3.'"

4 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. Re:No one is forcing them... by Ingolfke · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why not just stay with GPLV2?

    They did. They set their license to be GPLv2 only.

  2. Re:This makes no sense by Ed+Avis · · Score: 3, Informative
    For example a GPLv3-only-licensed patch would force MySQL to the new license.
    This is irrelevant since MySQL require copyright assignment for any code they add (this is implied by the article which says that the MySQL company owns the whole copyright for MySQL).
    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  3. Doublespeak by spiritraveller · · Score: 5, Informative

    Kaj Arno, MySQL VP of community relations, revealed the license change on his blog, on December 22, noting that the license for MySQL 5.0 and 5.1 had changed from "GPLv2 or later" to "GPLv2 only". As he explained, this was "in order to make it an option, not an obligation for the company to move to GPLv3".

    To be more clear, what they have done was **take away the option** for other people to distribute the code under a GPL version higher than GPL2. Under the old wording, the company has no obligation to distribute their code under GPL3, even after GPL3 is released.

    MySQL AB could continue distributing the code under GPL2 and leave others with the option of distributing their derivatives of it under GPL3. So their concern is what **other people** might do with their code, and has nothing to do with MySQL AB being forced to do anything.

    What they are actually concerned with is a forking of their project by a group of developers who prefer GPL3 over GPL2. Anyone so inclined could still create such a fork using a version of MySQL distributed under the old wording (including the most recent current versions, if they received the code under the old license). They just wouldn't be able to use any code from MySQL that came after the license change. It would have to be a clean break, with no sharing of code after the license change.

  4. Not a blank check by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 3, Informative

    The FSF has contractual obligation to me, and I guess thousands of other contributors, that limit what they can do to with the GPL. When you donate software to the FSF, you get a signed contract back stipulating what they can do with it. It obviously leaves some freedom to the FSF (as seen with GPL3), but it is not a blank check.