Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   jan-erik (jer@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 15:33:03 JST jan-erik

   Redis is not open source anymore.
   That sucks.

   I did a lot for Redis and in the community.
   To this day I'm #23 on the contributor list of the main code base. I maintained the docs and several client libraries. I helped run the IRC channel back in the day.
   I stopped most of my involvement some 6 years ago.

   • Embed this notice
     jan-erik (jer@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 15:33:09 JST jan-erik

     in reply to

     They also removed the "light governance model" they were running Redis under from 2020 onwards.
     At least they are clear about it.

     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 15:36:19 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • Simon Phipps
     • shironeko

     @shironeko No CLA necessary. Redis is simply exercising[0] their rights under the BSD license.

     This is what happens when people use a permissive license and the project is run by one central entity, which then does a gradual bait-and-switch, what @webmink calls a "rights ratchet", see his posts for more on this.

     [0] and overstepping, but they wouldn't have to, that's just clumsiness on their part

     @jer
     ♲ meshed.cloud/@webmink/11213299…

   • Embed this notice
     shironeko (shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 15:36:20 JST shironeko

     in reply to
     @jer this is what happens when people sign CLAs
   • Embed this notice
     jan-erik (jer@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 21:27:05 JST jan-erik

     in reply to

     • clacke
     • Simon Phipps
     • Exxo
     • shironeko

     @Exxo @clacke @shironeko @webmink there's a difference between the copyright and the license.
     Them removing any notice of the former license and also copyright is questionable.
     Them taking the code and releasing future versions under a new license is fine and allowed.

     (and for my code contributions it probably doesn't matter, I'd be surprised if any of the actual code I ever wrote is still there)

     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Exxo (exxo@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 21:27:06 JST Exxo

     in reply to

     • clacke
     • Simon Phipps
     • shironeko

     @clacke

     I disagree (at least following German law):

     As long as no author has signed an CLA, they stay the owner of the intellectual property and their portion of code may only be used respecting the original (here BSD) license.

     Every link in the post you mentioned also refers to contributor agreement as a component for the "rights ratchet".

     But in practice I'm in doubt whether there is any chance in sueing Redis... so in consequence it makes no difference.

     @shironeko @webmink @jer

   • Embed this notice
     Simon Phipps (webmink@meshed.cloud)'s status on Friday, 22-Mar-2024 21:27:36 JST Simon Phipps

     in reply to

     • clacke
     • Exxo
     • shironeko

     @Exxo
     I focus on CLA because most projects use a license with at least a patent waiver and startups using rights-ratchet usually want to retain full patent leverage for their VCs so don't want to be subject to the license themselves. But in this case I don't think Redis started out as a rights-ratchet

     @clacke @shironeko @jer

     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 22:06:30 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • shironeko

     @shironeko You are correct. They cannot relicense the contributions of others, for contributed code they need to adhere to BSD & ( RSAL | SSPL ).

     Removing the BSD copyright notices is a license violation and shows a surprising level of incompetence. You'd think when making a controversial change they'd dot their Is and cross their Ts.

   • Embed this notice
     shironeko (shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 22:06:31 JST shironeko

     in reply to

     • clacke
     • Simon Phipps
     • Exxo
     • shironeko
     @jer @Exxo @clacke @webmink it's also why I assumed they had a CLA in place before that, cus otherwise they're just violating copyright. turns out they are dumber than I thought
   • Embed this notice
     shironeko (shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club)'s status on Sunday, 24-Mar-2024 22:06:32 JST shironeko

     in reply to

     • clacke
     • Simon Phipps
     • Exxo
     @jer @Exxo @clacke @webmink Yes, removing the former license directly violates 3BSD clause 1 and 2. I think you are staring to get it. 3BSD license does not allow you to relicense the code, it explicitly forbids it.
     They can use BSD code but they can't change the license on those code.