Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Oracle indemnifies PostgreSQL on its patents

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Oracle indemnifies PostgreSQL on its patents
Date: 2007-03-31 18:54:51
Message-ID: 7531.1175367291@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> I would be worried if I were you (or Joshua Drake for that matter): does
> the agreement apply to commercial companies deriving products from
> PostgreSQL as well?

Interesting point.  It's doubtless unwise to take this press release as
being an accurate guide to the terms of the license, but what it says
is

: According to the terms of the OIN license, the components covered by
: the agreement include not only the Linux kernel and associated GNU
: applications, but also other open source projects included in Linux
: distributions. 

which to me says you're covered as long as your code is commonly
included in Linux distributions.  Hence, proprietary derivatives
would *not* be covered.  I'd guess that Oracle would have a hard
time suing for any patent violation embedded in the freely
distributed Postgres code, but any technique appearing only in
the proprietary extension would still be at risk.

IANAL, etc.  I assume that EDB and Greenplum will have their
lawyers scrutinizing this deal on Monday morning ;-) ... I'd
be interested to hear what the experts' conclusion is.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-03-31 19:00:40
Subject: Re: CIC and deadlocks
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-03-31 18:32:18
Subject: Re: Oracle indemnifies PostgreSQL on its patents

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group