(Referencing https://github.com/redis-rs/redis-rs/issues/1419 )
I'm sure a lot of these legal threats would go away very quickly if the possibility of a large scale legal battle was on the horizon every single time. Or at least, they'd be a lot more willing to settle quickly if their opponent was fairly evenly matched resources wise.
And yeah, I wish FSF or some other, strong and well-funded org would be more "broken glass" and take issue with even the tiniest of legal fights over OSS.
One more reason to move to valkey i guess.
It looks to be about providing support to paying users of Redis in a library that doesn't have much goals.
And they offered to pay for it to do it.
> These are not my words nor the message I want to convey. In a private call, I said that it feels strange to use the brand name for a library that keeps supporting all the forks indefinitely and does not grant compatibility for the product itself. I also said that it does not make a lot of sense to pretend to rename a crate and replace it with the same software or an alternative library, thus creating confusion and frustration. However, companies do consider protecting their trademarks where their reputation is challenged. This does not need any explanation. In my private call with Armin, I highlighted that. Of course, there is no plan to take action regarding the trademark, but to find a reasoned and agreed-upon way forward to avoid introducing another Redis Rust client library where changes, improvements, and innovation can be introduced.
So basically the point is to make thinly veiled threats of copyright enforcement to „agree to a solution“.
The Mafia also agrees with you on a payment plan after highlighting that a fire would be a shame in your establishment.
Your response is alittle over emotional.
> That quote even says they're not looking to take action over the trademark.
Yeah, he’s basically saying „also, we think you’re infringing but we won’t have to enforce that, right? I’m sure we can come to an agreement, wink wink“.
Maybe I’m reading this completely wrong but this reminder is basically a threat to sue you to death if you don’t comply.
IMO you are because your attempting to "read between the lines" and add things that aren't there while ignoring things that contradictory to what this hypothetical lawsuit would include.
He says they don't want to cause a mess of renaming, or forking because it would be worse off and confusing for everyone