* Marc G. Fournier:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>> Curiously, the risk for MySQL here is not that Oracle becomes an
>> Open Source company, but that they license InnoDB and Berkeley DB
>> under open source licenses only (which would be a heavy blow to
>> other Sleepycat customers as well, by the way).
>
> Now *that* is a possibility that I hadn't thought of ... so you are
> suggesting that Oracle's direction might be to remove the Dual-License
> in favor of a purely OSS license for those technologies?
If I were a MySQL customer who needed the dual-license option, I would
be very concerned about this possibility, especially since two
backends in a row have been hit.
> So, for instance, InnoDB would still be available, but *only* to
> those that haven't licensed a copy of MySQL? I like that one ... :)
I think you mean "available only under the terms of the GPL", and
"licensed a copy of MySQL under terms different from the GPL". 8-)