Open Stack

Proxying from yahoo's open source director (since he wasn't initially subscribed to this list, afaik he now is) on his behalf.

>From Gil Yehuda (Yahoo’s Open Source director).

I would urge you to avoid creating a dependency between Openstack code and any AGPL project, including MongoDB. MongoDB is licensed in a very strange manner that is prone to creating unintended licensing mistakes (a lawyer’s dream). Indeed, MongoDB itself presents Apache licensed drivers – and thus technically, users of those drivers are not impacted by the AGPL terms. MongoDB Inc. is in the unique position to license their drivers this way (although they appear to violate the AGPL license) since MongoDB is not going to sue themselves for their own violation. However, others in the community create MongoDB drivers are licensing those drivers under the Apache and MIT licenses – which does pose a problem.

Why? The AGPL considers 'Corresponding Source' to be defined as “the source code for shared libraries and dynamically linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require, such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those subprograms and other parts of the work." Database drivers *are* work that is designed to require by intimate data communication or control flow between those subprograms and other parts of the work. So anyone using MongoDB with any other driver now invites an unknown --  that one court case, one judge, can read the license under its plain meaning and decide that AGPL terms apply as stated. We have no way to know how far they apply since this license has not been tested in court yet.
Despite all the FAQs MongoDB puts on their site indicating they don't really mean to assert the license terms, normally when you provide a license, you mean those terms. If they did not mean those terms, they would not use this license. I hope they intended to do something good (to get contributions back without impacting applications using their database) but, even good intentions have unintended consequences. Companies with deep enough pockets to be lawsuit targets, and companies who want to be good open source citizens face the problem that using MongoDB anywhere invites the future risk of legal catastrophe. A simple development change in an open source project can change the economics drastically. This is simply unsafe and unwise.

OpenStack's ecosystem is fueled by the interests of many commercial ventures who wish to cooperate in the open source manner, but then leverage commercial opportunities they hope to create. I suggest that using MongoDB anywhere in this project will result in a loss of opportunity -- real or perceived, that would outweigh the benefits MongoDB itself provides.

tl;dr version: If you want to use MongoDB in your company, that's your call. Please don't turn anyone who uses OpenStack components into a unsuspecting MongoDB users. Instead, decouple the database from the project. It's not worth the legal risk, nor the impact on the "Apache-ness" of this project.


Gil Yehuda
Sr. Director Of Open Source, Open Standards, Yahoo! Inc.
gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com

From: <Fox>, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov<mailto:Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 at 2:38 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Cc: "legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org<mailto:legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org>" <legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org<mailto:legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Marconi] Why is marconi a queue implementation vs a provisioning API?

Its my understanding that the only case the A in the AGPL would kick in is if the cloud provider made a change to MongoDB and exposed the MongoDB instance to users. Then the users would have to be able to download the changed code. Since Marconi's in front, the user is Marconi, and wouldn't ever want to download the source. As far as I can tell, in this use case, the AGPL'ed MongoDB is not really any different then the GPL'ed MySQL in footprint here. MySQL is acceptable, so why isn't MongoDB?

It would be good to get legal's official take on this. It would be a shame to make major architectural decisions based on license assumptions that turn out not to be true. I'm cc-ing them.

Thanks,
Kevin
________________________________________
From: Chris Friesen [chris.friesen at windriver.com<mailto:chris.friesen at windriver.com>]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 2:24 PM
To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Marconi] Why is marconi a queue implementation vs a provisioning API?

On 03/19/2014 02:24 PM, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Can someone please give more detail into why MongoDB being AGPL is a
problem? The drivers that Marconi uses are Apache2 licensed, MongoDB is
separated by the network stack and MongoDB is not exposed to the Marconi
users so I don't think the 'A' part of the GPL really kicks in at all
since the MongoDB "user" is the cloud provider, not the cloud end user?

Even if MongoDB was exposed to end-users, would that be a problem?

Obviously the source to MongoDB would need to be made available
(presumably it already is) but does the AGPL licence "contaminate" the
Marconi stuff?  I would have thought that would fall under "mere
aggregation".

Chris

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/legal-discuss/attachments/20140320/07d5dfe4/attachment-0001.html>