Monday, December 6, 2010

Thoughts on recent Hudson trademark issues

Recently I have seen several tweets and blogs on forking Hudson and I also come across this article on how Oracle is trying to assert its trademark on Hudson. This trademark thing simply disgusts me to say the least.

I have been involved with Hudson from very early days and I think my first post to Hudson's user mailing list was in early 2007 and I even wrote a little portlet that aggregated data from Hudson. I am not a kind of guy who tries to get his head around copyright issues and different OSS licenses but I always understood that

  • Hudson started as Kohsuke Kawaguchi's pet project and he worked on top of his regular day job
  • Kohsuke did and still does an awesome job of being involved with community and as a result got several committers and plugin developers
  • Hudson got popular enough that Sun thought it deserved Kohsuke's full attention and they also started selling support for it.
So more or less Hudson has been a perfect example of OSS where both project and community have had mutual relationship. Why would anyone want to impose a trademark on it? Oracle has been in news mainly for bad reasons among java community and this simply asserts why java community does not trust Oracle to be a good steward for Java. Leave Hudson as it is Oracle and start working with community, not against it. !!


Bing AM said...

Remember, Kohsuke was also employed full time by Sun to work on Hudson for a good couple of years, so that means Sun owned some of the intellectual property.

Oracle acquired Sun, as a business, Oracle will assert that IP ownership aggresively. Oracle doesn't get to the Oracle today by having your way of thinking.

I agree that Ted Farrel / Oracle's way of dealing with the community was awful, but as a business, CloudBees / InfraDNA also needs Oracle and a healthy Hudson brand.

Prabhat Jha said...

I understand the business part. But Hudson is not something that was baked inside Sun or Oracle and it's not a typical close source product so it should not be treated as such.