From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 6 16:45:03 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D646A106567A for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 16:45:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xaero@xaerolimit.net) Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com (mail-ey0-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688E68FC1A for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 16:45:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eyb7 with SMTP id 7so2253273eyb.13 for ; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 09:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.6.201 with SMTP id a9mr2509386eba.18.1289061902100; Sat, 06 Nov 2010 09:45:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.10.65 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 09:44:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20101106161636.GD12418@guilt.hydra> References: <4CD45A11.7060002@stillbilde.net> <20101105213433.GC8648@guilt.hydra> <4CD4D8A9.8030900@too1337.com> <20101106161636.GD12418@guilt.hydra> From: Chris Brennan Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 12:44:41 -0400 Message-ID: To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: ZFS License and Future X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2010 16:45:03 -0000 On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 11:25:13PM -0500, Steven Susbauer wrote: > > On 11/5/10 4:34 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: > > >Will Oracle start using patent suits to try to stop people > > >who aren't paying for ZFS or who are using it on platforms other than > > >Solaris from using it? > > > > > >Whether you think concerns like these will prove reasonable in the long > > >run, they make a lot more sense than assuming that Alejandro just > wonders > > >if the CDDL is "dangerous" somehow. > > > > > > > I would be surprised. Oracle (real Oracle, not Sun) is still the primary > > developer of btrfs on Linux. They are pretty much going for feature > > parity with ZFS and want people to actually use it. If they start suing > > over ZFS patents which are certainly applicable to btrfs, it will have > > repercussions on that side. > > Perhaps. > > On the other hand, Oracle could offer some kind of "patent covenant" > protecting btrfs while going after a ZFS fork as a way of "focing" people > to migrate from it to btrfs, as a more hostile way of achieving what > Microsoft does when it ends support for an older OS to get people to buy > the newer Windows release. > > . . . or maybe Oracle will decide it doesn't need the open source > community's help any longer at some future date, and shut down *both* > open source filesystem development projects. > > Oracle is known to be at least intermittently hostile toward open source > software, in ways that are sometimes more frightening than Microsoft's > hostility. This is scaring people, and I don't blame them. The > uncertainty about Oracle's future position on everything it has acquired > with Sun is something that will need to be tested and observed to see how > it shakes out in the next few years; in the meantime, I do not blame > anyone for being cautious about committing to use of open source software > under the Oracle umbrella. > > -- > Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] > Chad, what are these attachments to your e-mail? My client keeps flagging your mail as questionable and I'm sandboxing it to make sure it's nothing bad :D