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?
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Received on Sun Oct 09 2005 - 17:25:00 CDT
