Re: Oracle Innobase Purchase Impacts MySQL.

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 22:43:34 -0700
Message-ID: <1128923014.258374@yasure>

Serge Rielau wrote:
> DA Morgan wrote:
>

>> Serge Rielau wrote:
>>
>>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jim Kennedy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <saghir.taj_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:1128853793.475008.244320_at_g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>> As reported in several sources Oracle has acquired Innobase Oy for an
>>>>>> undisclosed sum of money.This appears to be a strategic move by 
>>>>>> Oracle
>>>>>> to put MySQL between a rock and hard place...... For Full Story 
>>>>>> visit.
>>>>>> http://www.dbnest.com/news.php?nid=1009&cid=3.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> www.DBNest.com: The Nest of DB Professionals.
>>>>>> www.ResumeDump.com: A carrier Partner.
>>>>>> www.dubai4me.net: Making your life Easier.
>>>>>> www.Libya4me.com: Supporting Libyan Community.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting.  I wonder if Innobase stepped on any Oracle patents 
>>>>> and this is
>>>>> a way to take care of that.  Notice the sum is undisclosed.
>>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't be surprised. I'm waiting for Microsoft to release SQL Server
>>>> 2005 and its blatant attempt to imitate Oracle's multiversion read
>>>> consistency. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the law suits are already
>>>> drawn up: They should be!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel,
>>>
>>> Patents are not to be paid to the one who first uses a feature in a 
>>> commercial system. Even IFF Oracle held any patents on the _concept_ 
>>> of multiversion read consitency (which I highly doubt and which is 
>>> entirely different from a fight about patents in the 
>>> _actual_implementation_) these would very likely have expired by 
>>> now.....
>>> Also keep in mind that most major software vendors have cross 
>>> licencing agreements in place:
>>> "You don't sue me, I don't sue you, and btw one of us pays the other 
>>> some sort of flat fee because they have more patents (mostly measured 
>>> in inch of paper)"
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Serge
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you say SCO?

>
> If I worked for Oracle I'd be quite offended right now.
>
> Aside SCO vs the world is all about licensing and copyright,
> not patents.
> Entirely different game unless you want to allege that SQL Server is
> based on Oracle (it's based on Sybase) or that Oracle source code is,
> how shall I put this... up for graps.
>
> Cheers
> Serge

Didn't mean to imply that Oracle was even remotely like SCO. SCO should by lynched by a panel of judges. What I was trying to indicate is that corporations consider legal action just one more tool. And I would expect Oracle to look out for its stockholder's best interests. Nothing more ... nothing less.

Has Microsoft stolen Oracle source code? Doubt it. Have they duplicated patented technology? Quite another matter. Though from what I've seen of it I am not impressed. Seems to eat CPU like it was an infinite resource.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)

Received on Mon Oct 10 2005 - 00:43:34 CDT