Two months ago, AWS launched a Distro for Elasticsearch Open , the official said that this is an enhanced release Elasticsearch to create objective of the project is not to fork Elasticsearch, they will continue to contribute to upstream projects.
Even so, for this act of AWS, some people still believe in the division Elasticsearch, even in the open division.
The idea that because Amazon treat open-source approach, combined with like Open Source Initiative (OSI) industry associations such lack of leadership, which would stifle the innovation of open source, commercial and open source makes less feasible.
The result is that finally led to a growing number of proprietary and open-source software to become closed-source software - to resist such as AWS cloud vendors "predatory" (there are dozens of companies have changed their authorized in 2018 license), or switched to permit such as "source-available".
Of course, the above mentioned selected closed-source software mainly refers to the class of infrastructure software. But if the problem between AWS and other cloud vendors and open source software can not be resolved, we believe that open source software will be "more features" on the Enterprise Edition provides.
Some people who have cited the behavior of "aggressive" in terms of revenue made in Amazon:
- The use of open-source projects and as a provider of business services, but does not offer anything in return to create and maintain open source projects commercial entity, this is off their "way of getting money."
- Bifurcation open source projects, and forced them away from the control of the creation and maintenance of business entity open source projects, like Elasticsearch.
- "Hijacking (hijacks)" open source API, and place them on their own proprietary solutions that will attract customers from the open source project to their own proprietary solutions, example is compatible with AWS launched a new database MongoDB API products Document (mainly in order to circumvent the new license MongoDB).
Amazon treat open source attitude obviously very selfish, but standing on its point of view, this is a very sensible move, even an optimal solution, because what it does is under license rules allow. But since we are very critical of this behavior, which requires trade associations to create a new open source license standards to meet the reasonable demands of the open-source authors -
"I do not want their open source service run as a business."
Only thus can curb that kind of behavior, like AWS, and to avoid adverse consequences resulting in the appearance.
But when MongoDB SSPL submit their license applications to OSI, but it raised questions of the community, some people think SSPL violation of the open-source nature, it is because the value of open source allows anyone to use open source software (open source in any form within the range permitted by the protocol). However, MongoDB had always believed, SSPL conform to the approved standards in line with the open source program.
Since the trade association does not recognize the open source licenses open source software vendors to submit, then they in order to "protect themselves" what to do? You can only change the way software licensing, open source software and even closed source?
If the lack of checks on the "abuse" open source behavior, no matter a great deal of harm to the open-source software contributors or users, and the whole market will be.