On 07/23/2018 12:06 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
So, is it FUD? The core needs paid-for legal advice, not speculation.
I'm quite certain that a software license can make a patent grant to the
satisfaction of many open source communities, and almost certainly to
the satisfaction of the PG community. But it will take an IP lawyer to
review or write such a license.
And is the payback worth it? Many don't think so.
Although Nico is correct, I also think we need to consider what the
community wants here. Historically, we have always explicitly avoided
anything to do with patents to the point where some hackers won't even
read white papers on patented methods. I do think there is a definite
technological advantage for PostgreSQL if there was a license that core
could accept that was patent friendly but frankly, I don't think that
core or the community has the desire to work through the cost of doing so.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc
*** A fault and talent of mine is to tell it exactly how it is. ***
PostgreSQL centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://postgresconf.org
***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****
