Archive for the ‘M&A’ Category

451 CAOS Links 2011.09.23

Сентябрь 23rd, 2011

Red Hat revenue up 28% in Q2. Funding for NoSQL vendors. And more.

# Red Hat reported net income of $40m in the second quarter on revenue up 28% to $281.3m.

# 10gen raised $20m in funding, while DataStax closed an $11m series B round, while also releasing its DataStax Enterprise and Community products. Additionally Neo Technology raised $10.6m series A funding.

# Oracle announced the addition of new extended capabilities in MySQL Enterprise Edition. The move confirmed the adoption of the open core licensing strategy, and was both welcomed and derided.

# BonitaSoft announced an $11m series B funding round.\

# Platfora raised $5.7m in series A funding to accelerate development of its BI and analytics platform for data stored in Hadoop.

# EMC launched its EMC Greenplum Modular Data Computing Appliance, which includes both the Greenplum Database and Greenplum HD (Hadoop), and introduced the Greenplum Analytics Workbench, a test bed cluster for integration testing Apache Hadoop.

# Oracle acquired GoAhead Software, which offers a commercial distribution of OpenSAF.

# Ingres changed its name to Actian and launched its Action Apps and Cloud Action Platform.

# Richard Stallman asked ‘Is Android really free software?’. Predictably enough the answer is ‘no’. Carlo Daffara called FUD.

# LexisNexis Risk Solutions’ HPCC Systems released the source code for its HPCC Systems platform, and introduced a covenant to keep contributed code open source for three years.

# OpenStack released Diablo, the fourth version of its open source cloud software.

# The PostgreSQL Global Development Group announced the release of PostgreSQL 9.1.

# VoltDB announced the general availability of VoltDB version 2.0.

# Samsung is reportedly planning to release its Bada mobile operating system under an open source license.

# Karmasphere updated its Karmasphere Analyst Big Data analytics product with new workflow capabilities for Apache Hadoop.

# The Open Virtualization Alliance now has more than 200 members.

# The Outercurve Foundation announced the acceptance of the GADS open source project into its Data, Language and System Interoperability Gallery.

# Openbravo announced that customer deployments of its ERP product on Amazon have increased over 187% in the last 12 months.

# The Apache Software Foundation confirmed Apache Whirr as a top-level project.

# Qt gained more independence from Nokia.

# SUSE Linux Enterprise Server has been selected for Use with SAP HANA.

# Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 was certified by SAP to run SAP business applications, as well as support for SAP running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux on Amazon EC2.

# 10gen’s MongoDB was chosen by SAP as a core component of SAP’s platform-as-a-service (PaaS) offering.

# Puppet Labs announced Puppet Enterprise 2.0.

# Microsoft added Casio to its list of Linux-related patent agreement signees.

# Dries Buytaert explained why Acquia acquired Cyrve and GVS and addressed concern that Acquia is sucking up all the Drupal talent.

# Medsphere Systems announced the generally availability of the enhanced OpenVista electronic health record (EHR) platform.

# Stormy Peters asked whether open source is excluding high context cultures.

# OpenIndiana’s fork of OpenSolaris added support for the Illumos kernel.

# Cenatic released the results of its research into public administration involvement in open source communities.

# Spring Roo is shifting to be 100% Apache licensed.

# VLC developers are looking for anyone who has contributed to libVLC so that they can approve the change in licence from GPLv2 to LGPLv2.

# Virtual Bridges joined OpenStack.

# Github now has over one million users.

# Splunk open sourced the code for docs.splunk.com.


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

Does Consona-Compiere mean community doesn’t matter?

Июнь 22nd, 2010

There was another acquisition involving open source software recently when Consona bought Compiere, but what is perhaps most striking about the deal from an open source software perspective is how little it and the Compiere community mattered in the deal.

By most accounts, including that of fellow open source ERP player xTuple CEO Ned Lilly, who offers an interesting and accurate depiction of Compiere’s changes, acknowledge the movement away from community that occurred over the last few years at Compiere. As discussed in our own recent report on the deal, we are also somewhat skeptical over the fate of what is left of Compiere’s open source community, even though Consona plans to continue offering both paid and free versions. At the same time, we are also wondering whether it will matter much — to Consona, to Compiere or even to its customers?

So how does this jibe, or not, with our views on how M&A deals and valuations involving open source software vendors tend to highlight the value of open source communities?

Community has served to drive up the price in deals stretching back for years (Citrix-XenSource for $500m, August 2007; Nokia-Trolltech at $153m, January 2008; Sun-MySQL for $1 billion, January 2008; VMware-SpringSource $420m, August 2009), but the reality in the case of Consona-Compiere (price not disclosed) is that community, or lack of a vibrant open source software community, may have actually driven the price down.

We must also consider the significance of cloud computing here. Cloud capabilities and possibilities in the enterprise version of Compiere’s platform may have trumped community in this case, but the deal still serves to remind open source software companies, as well as their existing and potential partners and acquirers, that community counts.


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

Log Buffer #182, a Carnival of the Vanities for DBAs

Март 12th, 2010

This is the 182nd edition of Log Buffer, the weekly review of database blogs. Make sure to read the whole edition so you do not miss where to submit your SQL limerick!

This week started out with me posting about International Women’s Day, and has me personally attending Confoo (Montreal) which is an excellent conference I hope to return to next year. I learned a lot from confoo, especially the blending nosql and sql session I attended.

This week was also the Hotsos Symposium. Doug’s Oracle Blog has a series of posts about Hotsos. If all this talk about conferences has gotten you excited, Joshua Drake notes that 14 days and the hotel is almost full for postgresql conference east which is March 25th-28th in Philadelphia. And the Oracle database insider notes that the Oracle OpenWorld call for papers is now open.

According to Susan Visser this week (ending tomorrow) is also read an e-book week. So if you have not already done so, read an e-book! She links a coupon for an e-book in the post.

Craig Mullins notes that the mainframe is a good career choice in Mainframes: The Safe IT Career Choice. He notes that the mainframe is still not dead:

People having been predicting the death of the mainframe since the advent of client/server in the late 1980s. That is more than 20 years! Think of all the things that have died in that timespan while the mainframe keeps on chugging away: IBM’s PC business, Circuit City, Koogle peanut butter, public pay phones, Johnny Cash… the list is endless.

In other career-related news, Antonio Cangiano is looking for [2] top-notch student hackers for a 16-month internship at IBM in Toronto starting in May. All the details, including how to apply, are in Cangiano’s blog post.

Willie Favero wants to know how you “solve the batch dilemma” for issues like “shrinking your batch window, designing your batch to play nicely with … OLTP” in how’s your batch workload doing? Perhaps Favero should read the updated batch best practices posted by Anthony Shorten.

Bryan Smith surveys a more personal question by asking if you go both ways and “manage both DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows and DB2 for z/OS” in don’t ask, don’t tell, bi-platform DBAs. This week’s Log Buffer editor admits to being a tri-platform DBA — she has tried many platforms, and in fact, many databases (MySQL, Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, Sybase, Postgres and Ingres)!

Hari Prasanna Srinivasan promotes a patching survey in Oracle really wants to hear from you! Patching Survey.

Henrik Loeser explains what a deadlock and a hot spot are by using a real life analogy taken from a police report in deadlock and hot spot in real life.

Jamie Thomson asks why do you abbreviate schema names?. Shlomi Noach tries to solve the issue that “there is no consistent convention as for how to write [about table aliases in] an SQL query” in proper sql table alias use conventions. Noach also gives us a tip: faster than truncate.

Leons Petrazickis reminds us that “rulesets are chains” and it is important to have your rulesets in the proper order in iptables firewall pitfall.

Anyone interested in the history of MySQL AB will be informed after reading Dries Buytaert’s article.
Gavin Towey shares his software that helps centrally manage 120 MySQL servers in qsh.pl: distributed query tool For those who want to learn more about column-oriented databases, particularly in MySQL, Robin Schumacher of the InfiniDB blog announces that there is a MySQL University session recording on MySQL column databases now available. MySQL join-fu expert Jay Pipes has moved his blog to www.joinfu.com and starts with An SQL Puzzle and of course a follow up on the sql puzzle.

Ivan Zoratti is happy that finally, slides posted for the MySQL DW breakfast. Venu Anuganti gives you tips on one of the most common MySQL frustrations: optimizing subqueries in how to improve subqueries derived tables performance. Justin Swanhart posts the way in which he Gets Linux performance information from your MySQL database without shell access and emulates a ‘top’ CPU summary using /proc/stat and MySQL using the same method.

The Oracle Apps blog has an introduction to Oracle user productivity kit (UPK). Even though in this editor’s opinion the article is very sales-pitchy, it has valuable information, and does indeed live up to its promise:

UPK is a software tool that can capture all the steps in a system process. It records every keystroke, every click of the mouse, each menu option chosen and each button pressed. All this is done in the UPK Recorder by going through the transaction and pressing “printscreen” after every user action. From this, without any further effort from the developer, UPK builds a number of valuable outputs.

Allen White gives a great tip on how to optimize queries in keep your data clean.

Mike Dietrich reminds you to remove “old” parameters and events from your init.ora when upgrading, “as keeping them will definitely slow down the database performance in the new release.” He shows evidence of slowness when this is not done. Dietrich also shows how you can be gathering workload statistics “to give the optimizer some good knowledge about how powerful your IO-system might be”, especially “a few days after upgrading to the new release…while a real workload is running.”

Brian Aker shows the exciting features coming soon in Drizzle in Drizzle, Cherry, Roadmap for our Next Release.

Maybe you are thinking of migrating, not upgrading…..The O’Reilly Radar shows how to asses an Oracle to MySQL migration in MySQL migration and risk management. Actually, that article interviews Ronald Bradford on the subject — Bradford has been prolific lately, updating free my.cnf advice series and “Don’t Assume”: MySQL for the Oracle DBA series. Nick Quarmby also talks about migrating Oracle, but not to a new database, just to a new platform, in his primer on migrating Oracle Applications to new platforms. And the big news comes from Carlos of dataprix that Twitter will migrate from MySQL to Cassandra DB.

Paul S. Randal explains his way of benchmarking: 1 Tb table population on SQL Server.

Pete Finnigan shares his slides from a webinar on how to secure oracle, and Denis Pilipchuk shares his approaches for discovering security vulnerabilities in software applications.

Jeff Davis shares his thoughts about scalability and the relational model. Robert Treat responds actually, the relational model doesn’t scale and Baron Schwartz counters with NoSQL doesn’t mean non-relational.

Buck Woody explains “whenever you want to know something about SQL Server’s configuration, whether that’s the Instance itself or a database, you have a few options” — and of course what those options are — in system variables, stored procedures or functions for meta data.

This week’s T-SQL Tuesday topic was I/O. There are many links to great blog posts in the comments; three random posts I chose to highlight: Michael Zilberstein talks about IO capacity planning, while Kalen Delaney talks about using STATISTICS IO in I/O, you know, and Merrill Aldrich chimes in with information on real world SSD’s. Aldrich also begs folks not to waste resources and make more work for developers and DBAs in dear ISV, you’re keeping me awake nights with your VARCHAR() dates.

And we end with a bit of fin: Paul Nielsen wants us all to have a bit of fun; he has posted an SQL limerick and asks readers to create there own in there once was in Dublin a query.


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

CAOS Theory Podcast 2010.01.22

Январь 22nd, 2010

Topics for this podcast:

*Open source in consumer devices
*VMware-Zimbra deal highlights open source, cloud
*A capitalist’s guide to open source licensing
*Latest on Oracle-Sun-MySQL, M&A implications

iTunes or direct download (24:48, 5.7 MB)


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

CAOS Theory Podcast 2010.01.22

Январь 22nd, 2010

Topics for this podcast:

*Open source in consumer devices
*VMware-Zimbra deal highlights open source, cloud
*A capitalist’s guide to open source licensing
*Latest on Oracle-Sun-MySQL, M&A implications

iTunes or direct download (24:48, 5.7 MB)


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

A guide to The 451 Group’s open source software coverage

Январь 13th, 2010

Regular visitors to the 451 CAOS Theory blog will be well aware of The 451 Group’s CAOS (Commercial Adoption of Open Source) research service and our CAOS long-form reports.

They are probably less aware of the open source coverage that The 451 Group provides on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis, however, and I thought it would be worthwhile to provide some examples of The 451 Group’s ongoing open source coverage by highlighting a few recent reports.

The company’s core services are 451 Market Insight Service, which delivers daily insight into emerging enterprise IT markets, and 451 TechDealmaker, a forward-looking weekly analysis service focused on M&A activity within the enterprise IT business.

Here’s some examples of how our coverage fits in to those two services. Needless to say, these reports are only available to clients, although you can apply for trial access. Vendors - open source or otherwise - do not have to be clients in order to be covered by our analysts.

451 Market Insight Service
The 451’s CAOS analysts - Jay and I - are responsible for much of the coverage of open source specialist vendors. Recent examples include:

Meanwhile The 451 Group’s team of analysts also cover open source related vendors in their respective coverage areas, often in conjunction with CAOS analysts. For example:

Additionally, we also provide reports assessing the strategies of proprietary/mixed source vendors towards open source. Examples include:

In addition to our vendor-centric MIS output, open source also regularly makes an appearance in our reports assessing wider industry trends. For example:

451 TechDealmaker
451 Group analysts follow open source-related M&A in their coverage areas, again often working with the CAOS analsyst. Examples include:

While we also provide reports assessing the prospects of potential acquirers and targets alike. For example:

And again, open source makes an appearance in our reports assessing wider industry trends. For example:

For those with an interest in M&A it is also worth mentioning is 451 M&A KnowledgeBase – the company’s merger and acquisition database, which contains details of all M&A deals tracked by The 451 Group, and offers the ability to filter search results to contain deals that are themed “open source”.


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

Save MySQL would not spare open source M&A

Январь 12th, 2010

A recent pitch from the folks opposing Oracle’s ownership of MySQL via acquisition of Sun Microsystems got me thinking. The plea, ‘Oracle can have Sun, but not MySQL’ may make sense to some, but to me it speaks to the irony of closing out Oracle or any company or anyone from open source. Upon further reflection and given 2010 is off to a roaring pace of M&A, I also began to wonder what the impact of the ‘Save MySQL’ campaign could be on open source in M&A, particularly if it was to successfully derail the acquisition or somehow decouple MySQL from Sun under Oracle?

What would it mean to carve out the open source projects, components, teams and support from companies involved in mergers and acquisitions over the last few years?

Would Citrix have still bought XenSource if Xen were cut out or somehow separated in any way shape or form from the deal? Would it have paid $500m?

Would Nokia have bought Trolltech and Qt for $153m?

More recently, would VMware have purchsed SpringSource for $420m if some or any of SpringSource’s open source projects, developers or holdings — including its own acquisitions Covalent and Hyperic — were not included?

Oh yeah, would we even be here with MySQL owned by Sun Microsystems if Sun were prevented from fully acquiring the project, code and company despite spending $1 billion two years ago?

Some degree of concern about Oracle’s potential ownership of MySQL or any ownership of open source projects and code is certainly warrented and prudent, but I don’t believe the fear that punctuates the message of the ‘Save MySQL’ campaign makes much sense. This is particularly so in light of the past deals listed here and others where the market has required continued investment and support of open source and provided continued revenue and benefits from open source.

While some of these scenarios may be admittedly implausible, I believe that separating out open source components, parts, projects and subsidiaries from vendors could certainly serve to dull the shine of open source software assets and vendors amid M&A valuations, prospects and strategy.


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

Don’t fear the reaper. Why FOSS should not fear M&A by proprietary vendors

Январь 8th, 2010

A couple of posts have been published recently worrying about the impact of more open source specialist vendors being acquired by proprietary vendors.

This is an issue that crops up occasionally. Usually when a major acquisition has been announced, and the current questioning seems to be driven by the ongoing saga of Oracle-Sun-MySQL, as well as the rumoured purchase of Zimbra by VMware.

While fear of the unknown is understandable, to my mind the concern about open source specialists being acquired by proprietary vendors is driven by parochialism and misplaced assumptions about the rate of acquisitions and the acquiring company’s intentions.

For a start the statistics suggest that acquisitions involving open source vendors have declined in recent years (contrary to our expectations to be honest). According to our preliminary figures there were 24 M&A deals involving open source vendors in 2009, compared to 29 in 2008 and 35 in 2007. Dave Rosenberg makes the case that we have seen less open source M&A than we might have expected.

There is always the fear, however, that a proprietary vendor could acquire an open source rival in order to shut it down. This is a theory we at The 451 Group investigated last year via a TechDealMaker service report asking “Could an open source project survive a hostile acquisition?” (451 clients can access the report here).

Looking at the history of M&A involving open source vendors we were unable to identify a single example of a proprietary vendor acquiring an open source project in order to kill it off.

Another significant fear involving open source acquisitions is that the acquiring company will suddenly change the licensing and/or pricing in order to generate revenue from users open source of the open source project.

To me this is a fear based on a false assumption that the only way to monetize open source is directly. If we look at the strategies used by proprietary vendors to generate revenue from open source (as we did oin our Market Insight Service report “How third parties generate revenue from open source“, which was itself adapted from our Open Source is Not a Business Model CAOS report) we find that they are more likely to do so indirectly via complementary products and services.

In contrast open source specialist vendors have no choice but to attempt to monetize the open source software directly, either through support or proprietary licensed add-ons, and we have observed that this creates an inherent tension.

There is also a false assumption that open source specialist vendors are more committed to an open source “philosophy”. Some are, to be sure, but some simply see open source as a means to an end - treating it as a license tactic that disrupts competitors and expends potential adoption. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but it does mean that for a great many open source “projects” the idea of the development community is a myth.

As previously discussed, Matt Asay noted last year that “vendors that have proprietary selling points elsewhere don’t need to control open-source code.”

In fact, I would suggest that vendors with proprietary selling points elsewhere have more to gain from releasing control of an open source project. Dirk Reihle explained the financial benefits this week with his Economic Case for Open Source Foundations, including sharing development expenses, increasing profits per sale, increases sales, and expanding the addressable market.

The fact that proprietary vendors have proprietary selling points elsewhere means that they are also in a better financial position to trade control for community via a foundational approach, in contrast to open source specialists.

There may well be situations where the acquisition of open source specialists by proprietary vendors might give cause for concern, but I believe it is wrong to assume that the impact will be negative. While many open source specialists might have something to fear regarding increased M&A activity, in the broader context open source software has more potentially to gain from the increased involvement of proprietary vendors than it has to lose.


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

Everything you always wanted to know about MySQL but were afraid to ask — part three

Январь 4th, 2010

Since the European Commission announced it was opening an in-depth investigation into the proposed takeover of Sun Microsystems by Oracle with a focus on MySQL there has been no shortage of opinion written about Oracle’s impending ownership of MySQL and its impact on MySQL users and commercial partners, as well as MySQL’s business model, dual licensing and the GPL.

In order to try and bring some order to the conversation, we have brought together some of the most referenced blog posts and news stories in chronological order.

Part one took us from the announcement of the EC’s in-depth investigation up to the eve of the communication of the EC’s Statement of Objections.

Part two took us from there to the eve of the announcement of Oracle’s concessions.

We will continue to update part three, below, until either the acquisition or the EC’s investigation closes.


December 14
: Oracle - Oracle Makes Commitments to Customers, Developers and Users of MySQL
“Oracle has engaged in constructive discussions with the European Commission regarding the concerns expressed by the Commission about the Oracle/Sun Microsystems transaction, and in particular the maintenance of MySQL as a competitive force in the database market. In order further to reassure the Commission, Oracle hereby publicly commits to the following…”

December 14: Commission welcomes Oracle’s MySQL announcement
“Today’s announcement by Oracle of a series of undertakings to customers, developers and users of MySQL is an important new element to be taken into account in the ongoing proceedings. In particular, Oracle’s binding contractual undertakings to storage engine vendors regarding copyright non-assertion and the extension over a period of up to 5 years of the terms and conditions of existing commercial licenses are significant new facts. In this context, Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes recalls and confirms her statement of 9 December 2009 that she is optimistic that the case will have a satisfactory outcome.”

December 14: Jeremy Zawodny - Trust Oracle? Why?
“Back a few years ago when Oracle dismissing MySQL in public while working hard against it in private, I realized that they were simply trying everything they could to protect their crowned jewels: public denials and classic FUD paired with hush-hugh backroom deals. Nobody has managed to explain, in even a mildly convincing way, what has changed since then. Why should we suddenly trust Oracle? Their crowned jewels are still threatened by MySQL.”

December 14: BusinessWeek - How Oracle Disarmed EU Critics
“The most influential provision in assuaging regulators’ concerns about the proposed acquisition may be one of the least noticed. Amid Oracle’s commitments was a pledge to let other technology vendors continue licensing MySQL for use in their products for another five years.”

December 15: Henrik Ingo - We scared Oracle a little, but their promises for MySQL are mostly an insult to the Commission
“5 years, or any amount of years, as a limit to such assurances is not satisfactory and customers and partners would immediately loose interest in MySQL with this promise. The only workable solution has to be perpetual and irrevocable promises.”

December 15: Stephen O’Grady - Oracle, MySQL and the EU: The Endgame Q&A
“Remember June of 2008? Oracle hiked its prices by 15-20% with no detectible impact to its volume. If MySQL was a real, substantial alternative, wouldn’t we have seen wholesale migrations away from Oracle to MySQL? That we didn’t, and continue not to, tells me they’re two different markets.”

December 16: Sheeri Cabral - A MySQL Community Member Opinion of Oracle Buying Sun
“The FUD about Oracle slowing development MySQL are not valid, and not true. The motivations behind those spreading this FUD are monetary and selfish. As a community member, I have seen Oracle put plenty of time, money and effort into developing InnoDB. I look forward to even more of Oracle’s resources being used to develop MySQL further.”

December 16: Monty Widenius - Oracle gives only empty promises for MySQL
“Oracle is trying to win the case through press releases and public pressure instead of really eliminating the European Commission’s concerns. They show no respect for the European authorities or how we do things here. Oracle just want to dictate their own terms and expect us to accept them on face value.”

December 17: AP - Oracle expects EU to approve Sun deal next month
“Oracle’s president, Safra Catz, said in a statement Thursday that the company now expects that European regulators will “unconditionally” approve the Sun acquisition in January.”

December 28: Monty Widenius - Help keep the Internet free
Monty Widenius launches his petition to help save MySQL by claiming (amongst other things) that “It’s not in the Internet users interest that one key piece of the net would be owned by an entity that has more to gain by severely limiting and in the long run even killing it as an open source product than by keeping it alive.”

December 29: Mark Callaghan - Save MySQL, save the world
“MPAB continues to drive away potential supporters with the tone of their messages, the inclusion of pointless assertions, and the complete lack of references.”

December 29: Sheeri Cabral - Save MySQL by letting Oracle keep it GPL
“I cannot say whether or not Oracle would kill MySQL. However, I have already stated I believe Oracle will not kill MySQL. This is based on the fact that Oracle has had the chance to kill MySQL for several years, by making InnoDB proprietary, and has not.”

January 3: David Nielsen - Why “helping MySQL” reflects poorly on us all
“This has nothing to do with the software’s freedom status and given the FSF’s behavior as well as argumentation throughout recent years, the entirety of the inherent freedoms remain intact even when forking the existing codebase, meaning that this is entirely about the right to make money from proprietary use cases of the code.”


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN

Everything you always wanted to know about MySQL but were afraid to ask

Октябрь 26th, 2009

Since the European Commission announced it was opening an in-depth investigation into the proposed takeover of Sun Microsystems by Oracle with a focus on MySQL there has been no shortage of opinion written about Oracle’s impending ownership of MySQL and its impact on MySQL users and commercial partners, as well as MySQL’s business model, dual licensing and the GPL.

In order to try and bring some order to the conversation, we have brought together some of the most referenced blog posts and news stories in chronological order. We will continue to update this post until either the acquisition or the EC’s investigation closes.

September 3: The European Commission announces that it has opened in-depth investigation into proposed takeover of Sun Microsystems by Oracle with a focus on MySQL.
“The Commission’s investigation has also shown that the open source nature of Sun’s MySQL might not eliminate fully the potential for anti-competitive effects. In its in-depth investigation, the Commission will therefore address a number of issues, including Oracle’s incentive to further develop MySQL as an open source database.”

September 4: 451 CAOS Theory - The EC is mostly, but not entirely, wrong about Oracle/MySQL.
“Copyright ownership does not just impact the ability to license code, it also provides control over potential commercial uses of that code. This is where it could be argued that the EC could be right to have anti-competitive concerns over Oracle’s future ownership of MySQL.”

September 4: Monty Program Ab Chief Community and Communications Officer Kurt von Finck tells Ars Technica that that copyright and dual licensing is a significant concern.
“If Oracle were to release MySQL under a different license, say the Apache license, this issue would be mitigated to an extent. But for now, Oracle has many more avenues of [MySQL-related] business and revenue than do others.”

September 15 451 CAOS Theory - Oracle *could* kill off MySQL as a commercial product, but probably won’t
“It is impossible to create a fork that can be integrated with non-GPL code (or at least it appears to be.)”

September 17
: Bill Schneider - Would MySQL survive without Oracle?
“MySQL is almost impossible to be monetized. More than 98 percent of the customer base is DIY, and they don’t see any value in paying for support.”

September 22: Oracle CEO Larry Ellison reportedly says Oracle will not spin off MySQL.
“Ellison asserted that Oracle and MySQL do not compete - and he said Oracle has no intention of spinning off MySQL.”

September 30: The Wall Street Journal reported that documents indicate that Oracle intends to use MySQL to compete with Microsoft SQL Server.
“Oracle’s position is that in the market for small to medium-sized business databases, Sun’s MySQL database product, enables the company to compete against Microsoft.”

October 1: Matt Asay reiterates that MySQL’s value to Oracle is about competing with Microsoft.
“Open source is simply a means to an end, and in the case of MySQL, a means to denting Microsoft’s rising strength in emerging markets where Oracle’s expensive database technology doesn’t resonate.”

October 1: Carlo Piana explains why he is assisting Oracle’s legal team to get the acquisition approved.
“It must be passed through as soon as possible, or the company will die. And with it, some of the good development teams that have considerably contributed to the success of Free Software.”

October 8: Former MySQL CEO Marten Mickos urges the EC to approve Oracle’s acquisition of Sun.
“I believe that Oracle’s acquisition of Sun (and MySQL) will increase competition in the database market. And I also believe that if, on the other hand, it becomes difficult or impossible for large companies to acquire open-source assets, then venture investments in open-source companies will slow down, harming the evolution of and innovation in open source, which would result in decreased competition.”

October 11: Oracle CEO Larry Ellison reportedly says Oracle will invest in MySQL.
“He added a new line to the previously four-point list, this one promising MySQL would also receive more money for development and research.”

October 19: MySQL creator and Monty Program CEO Monty Widenius urged Oracle to give up on MySQL in order to land Sun.
“MySQL needs a different home than Oracle, a home where there will be no conflicts of interest concerning how, or if, MySQL should be developed further.”

October 19: Richard Stallman, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) and the Open Rights Group sent a letter to the EC urging it to block Oracle’s acquisition of MySQL.
“If Oracle is allowed to acquire MySQL, it will predictably limit the development of the functionality and performance of the MySQL software platform, leading to profound harm to those who use MySQL software to power applications.”

October 19: Matt Asay argued that EU’s MySQL inquiry may backfire for open source.
“Why should commercial entities bother fostering community–the very community that makes them less susceptible to hostile takeover and anticompetitive forces–if doing so simply ends up ruining financial returns?”

October 20: Matt Asay and Simon Phipps note Stallman’s apparent admission that the GPL alone doesn’t guarantee software freedom.
“The GPL, which is supposed to be the ultimate guarantor of software freedom, may deliver the opposite.”

October 20: Sun Microsystems announced that it will lay off up to 3,000 people.
“The Board of Directors of Sun Microsystems, Inc. (the “Company”), in light of the delay in the closing of the acquisition of the Company, approved a plan to better align the Company’s resources with its strategic business objectives.”

October 20: 451 CAOS Theory - Closing Oracle out of open source?
“Although it might not be tasteful to all supporters of free and open source software, their very mantras and doctrines dictate their software and communities are open to all equally. Anything less is a contradiction of the core ideology of free and open source software.”

October 20: Carlo Piana - Apache what?
“I don’t see any suitable prospect investor which would be able both to pay the bill for this and to safeguard MySQL as Free Software more than Oracle is.”

October 21: 451 CAOS Theory - What about Woman’s Hour? Free speech, free markets and the future of MySQL
“The only possible argument in favour of the EC blocking Oracle’s acquisition of MySQL is that it is damaging to competition, not that it is damaging to MySQL itself. Otherwise we are asking the EC to rule on whether Oracle is open source-friendly enough to own MySQL, and that is neither something that an organisation like the EC is equipped to answer nor something that it should be asked to decide.”

October 21: Groklaw - Reasons I Believe the Community Should Support the Oracle-Sun Deal
“The most important reason is that opponents are trashing the GPL and calling it a source of “infection” in their FUD submission to the EU Commission.”

October 21: Kirk Wylie - Monty, Stallman, MySQL, Oracle, and Sun: Open Letter Wars
“Unfortunately, saying that you personally dislike something doesn’t provide a valid reason to block an acquisition on competition grounds. Saying that you don’t trust Oracle doesn’t alter the marketplace in a way that disadvantages customers as a whole. Saying that nobody else could make money by selling commercial licenses for MySQL doesn’t mean someone else must be allowed to.”

October 21: An EC spokesperson told The BBC that Oracle has not produced any evidence to ease its concerns.
“Oracle had failed to produce, despite repeated requests, either hard evidence that there were no competition problems or, alternatively, proposals for a remedy to the competition problems identified by the Commission.”

October 21: Tim Bray - The EU and MySQL
“If, in a merger or acquisition, partial control over a financially-insignificant Open-Source project can now be expected to result in many months of anti-trust review, that’s going to have a massive negative effect on the viability of M&A transactions all over the technology landscape.”

October 21: Jeremy Zawodny - Oracle and MySQL
“I haven’t yet seen anyone explain what motivation Oracle has for pouring resources into MySQL, especially if it eats away at their DBMS business on the low end.”

October 22: Ed Burnette - Stallman admits GPL flawed, proprietary licensing needed to pay for MySQL development
“Even if MySQL were owned by Oracle because of its purchase of Sun, the database would still be Free Software. Anyone could use the source code, build their own version, and distribute it to others. But finally Stallman has recognized that may not be good enough because somebody has to pay for this stuff.”

October 22
: Brian “Krow” Aker - RMS, GPL, The Peculiar Institution of Dual Licensing
“Dual licensing forces any developer who wishes to contribute into a position of either giving up their rights and allowing their work to end up in commercial software, or creating a fork of the software with their changes. In essence it creates monopolies which can only be broken via forking the software.”

October 23: Stephen O’Grady - Oracle, MySQL and the EU: The Q&A
“Given that Oracle has a negligible presence in the markets that Microsoft has been successful in, then, I think they’ll be the primary target. Meaning that competition shouldn’t be much of an issue.”

October 23: Karsten Garloff - The case for independence - Oracle, Sun and what to do with MySQL
“The present danger for MySQL shows how dependence on a single company (brought about by a dual-licensing strategy) puts even the most successful projects at risk.”

October 24: Monty Widenius - The importance of the license model of MySQL or Can MySQL be killed?
“It’s possible to create companies doing support for MySQL, but without the economics, there will not be enough money and incentive to pay enough for the development of MySQL to satisfy the requirement of all the MySQL users.”

October 24: JavaWorld - Who Should Oracle Sell MySQL To?
“It’s easy to suggest that Oracle should sell to a “suitable third party?” That’s just talk. The potentially significantly more difficult thing might be to actually find a buyer that meets the definition of “suitable” to all involved.”

October 25: Sacha Labourey - SUN vs./and ORCL: the failure of the dual licensing model?
“Some of the ex-MySQL co-founders who now ask for ORCL to let MySQL go are responsible for the current situation: their choice of a dual license business model years ago is what led to the current situation … but also what led MySQL to a 1B valuation. You cannot have it both ways I guess.”


PlanetMySQL Voting: Vote UP / Vote DOWN