I don’t think that’s correct. It maybe prohibits people from building a service to offer redis to third parties on Windows, but you can run redis in your stack on whatever OS you want, as long as what you are building is not “redis as a service”. So any end-user SaaS that just uses redis as a cache is not bound to section 13.
And even if you built a redis as a service, the operating system is not explicitly mentioned in the license, so it would be for a lawyer to say whether that’s required…
Well, it’s how I would interpret it, especially for Windows being a violation of section 13 (a little less for whether section 13 applies when you just use Redis: one could argue it applies to dynamic sites that really require fast responses as part of its feature set, which has to use something like Redis). It’s also an issue that nobody has interpreted the license in court yet.
Agree on the court, but the wording is super specific. Doesn’t matter if you couldn’t build it without a redis-like component, because of the speed or whatever, it is targeting “offering the program as a service”. There’s even an FAQ on the mongodb (SSPL authors) site regarding this. Unless your program is just a proxy to access redis, you’re fine.
offering a service the value of which entirely or primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version
Doing it fast is essential and a core part of many services’ value, I’m sure.
You have a point regarding the FAQ but I do not see that written in the license. This is a problem that would only be granted in case MongoDB/ElasticSearch/Redis sues someone for internal use and I think that’s a borderline risk too much to take.
That wording is pointing to reselling the program or the same functionality. Of course if your service is “fast key based data retrieval” it would violate the definition, but something like “low latency gaming notifications” would not, because the value is gaming notifications, something redis doesn’t offer. Same as if your service uses encryption in transit, you’re not just reselling openssl.
I know prohibiting reselling is what they probably intended. But that doesn’t mean they can’t push a different and very valid interpretation when they want to.
you’re not just reselling openssl.
The wording—“primarily derives from”—is much broader than “just”. I believe that Resque’s dependence on Redis is enough to satisfy “primarily”.
I don’t think that’s correct. It maybe prohibits people from building a service to offer redis to third parties on Windows, but you can run redis in your stack on whatever OS you want, as long as what you are building is not “redis as a service”. So any end-user SaaS that just uses redis as a cache is not bound to section 13.
And even if you built a redis as a service, the operating system is not explicitly mentioned in the license, so it would be for a lawyer to say whether that’s required…
Well, it’s how I would interpret it, especially for Windows being a violation of section 13 (a little less for whether section 13 applies when you just use Redis: one could argue it applies to dynamic sites that really require fast responses as part of its feature set, which has to use something like Redis). It’s also an issue that nobody has interpreted the license in court yet.
Agree on the court, but the wording is super specific. Doesn’t matter if you couldn’t build it without a redis-like component, because of the speed or whatever, it is targeting “offering the program as a service”. There’s even an FAQ on the mongodb (SSPL authors) site regarding this. Unless your program is just a proxy to access redis, you’re fine.
I feel like it qualifies under
Doing it fast is essential and a core part of many services’ value, I’m sure.
You have a point regarding the FAQ but I do not see that written in the license. This is a problem that would only be granted in case MongoDB/ElasticSearch/Redis sues someone for internal use and I think that’s a borderline risk too much to take.
That wording is pointing to reselling the program or the same functionality. Of course if your service is “fast key based data retrieval” it would violate the definition, but something like “low latency gaming notifications” would not, because the value is gaming notifications, something redis doesn’t offer. Same as if your service uses encryption in transit, you’re not just reselling openssl.
I know prohibiting reselling is what they probably intended. But that doesn’t mean they can’t push a different and very valid interpretation when they want to.
The wording—“primarily derives from”—is much broader than “just”. I believe that Resque’s dependence on Redis is enough to satisfy “primarily”.
Well, I don’t believe so, but as you said it’s ultimately for a court to test it.
deleted by creator