Re: mysql.org

[Justin Farnsworth]

David Axmark wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "Britt" == Britt Johnston <britt@stripped> writes:
> 
> Since Monty is travelling for 30 hours or so (from Australia) I will
> answer this.
[== snip, snip ==]

WOW!

Does everyone realize what is going on here?  I don't know,
I consider this stuff historic.  Perhaps, at least to this
quasi-agnostic observer, "Open Source Legal Resolution"
has been invented by accident.  I find it interesting
that facts are coming out, two parties are at least
tending to converge on a legal remedy in a gentlemanly
manner in the forum of great pressure as exerted by
the highly-interested MySQL community.

One has seen already the removal of the download registration
requirement on the NuSphere site, something that was
technically meaningless in a strict legal sense, but
perceived as onerous by the Community as representing
some kind of insult to "Open Source" or designed for
imagined sinister motives.

One has seen the modification of the NuSphere site
to gain clarity as to the identity of the MySQL
developer(s), heretofor apparantly obscure.

One has seen already the clarification by MySQL AB that
the existence of ex-officio support sites for MySQL are
encouraged, not confusing, and good for all, but that
the mysql.org site is, technically, only a trademark
issue, in their eyes.

One has seen a convergence to the real nub, visible to
all of us interested observers, that the remedy for
GPL violations is not satisfied by "late compliance"
or other possibly-obscure methods of compliance.

One has seen a revelation of a lot of things behind the
scenes that are perceived as a violation of the GPL
and, usually, to the general member of the Open
Source Community, may be complex, such as static
linking, the idea of shared copyright, the mutual
interpretation of the "agreement process"
between the two parties, et cetera.  Both parties
are now letting everything hang out...

One has seen a complete stake-out of all necessary
legal positions of both parties out-in-the-open
that would be necessary in any discovery process,
and, as a humorous aside comment, almost pre-empts
the necessity of having legal councel prior to
going before the judge.  By some quirk, we have
become the court and jury of judgement that both parties
feel the need to convince, and cannot ignore.

This is very interesting, this "Open Source Legal
Resolution".... ;-)

_jef


-- 
Justin Farnsworth
Eye Integrated Communications
321 South Evans - Suite 203
Greenville, NC 27858 | Tel: [phone]