Re: [HACKERS] Copyright

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)wallace(dot)ece(dot)rice(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Copyright
Date: 2000-01-29 20:11:02
Message-ID: 38934956.73530456@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
> > This depends on the definition of open source; I think Netscape is
> > OpenSource these days, but I doubt if anyone would be allowed to take the
> > sources and create "Petscape: The Dog's Browser". But, as far as I know, I
> > could go away tomorrow with the PostgreSQL sources and create "Mostgress",
> > so long as I did not try to sell it. AFAIK, I might even get away with
> > selling it, but it's not really the point.
>
> Yes you could. The original Postgres developers (or at least some of
> them) did just that in founding Illustra. They sold the company a
> couple of years later for $50M US to Informix.

Actually Postgres was _not_ distributed under the BSD (do-whatever-you-want
but
give credit) license but a much more restrictive license that required a
special
permission from UBC to to anything non-educational.

IIRC Stonebraker et al founded Illustra after getting special permissions from
UCB

The shift to BSD license (that enabled the current blooming of PostgreSQL ;)
was oftained sometime during the development of postgres 95, with some
considerable backing from Stonebraker.

>
-------------
Hannu

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-01-29 20:40:35 ImmediateSharedRelationCacheInvalidate considered harmful
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-01-29 19:53:19 Re: [HACKERS] Sure enough, SI buffer overrun is broken