On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 06:04:40PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> We have entered a new phase in the possible attacks on PostgreSQL.
>
> The purchase of InnoDB clearly shows Oracle is ready to expend money to
> slow down competitive database technology. Now that MySQL has been
> attacked, we should expect to be the next target.
>
> Let's assume Oracle is willing to spend 1% of their revenue or net
> income on attacking PostgreSQL. Given this financial statement:
>
> http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=ORCL&annual
>
> that would be USD $20-100 million. (The Oracle financial statement will
> eventually disclose the purchase price of InnoDB, and we can use that as
> a minimum amount they would be willing to spend.)
>
> Now, I think Oracle realizes that the database will eventually become a
> commodity based on their purchase of Peoplesoft and other application
> technology. However, every financial period they delay that time is
> more profit for them, so it is a cost/benefit of how much it is worth to
> slow down PostgreSQL. Obviously they thought the InnoDB purchase was
> worth it to slow down or control MySQL. Our goal should be to make the
> cost of attacks higher than the benefit.
>
> Here are the three most likely attacks on our project:
>
> o Hiring
>
> Oracle could hire a large portion of our paid or volunteer developers,
> thereby slowing down the project. Individuals would probably be
> approach as "We like your work on PostgreSQL and would like your
> expertise in improving Oracle", but of course once hired what they did
> for Oracle would be unimportant. What would be important is what they
> _don't_ do for PostgreSQL.
>
> o Trademark
>
> Marc Fournier owns the PostgreSQL trademark and domain names. He could
> be attacked, perhaps by hiring him to do a job, causing it to fail, then
> suing him to obtain the trademark, and therefore the right to own the
> domain names. The trademark has not been enforced, and it would be hard
> to enforce at this stage, but I think it would be effective in gaining
> control of the domain names.
>
> o Patents
>
> Most technology people agree the software patent system is broken, but
> it could be a potent weapon against us, though we have shown we can
> efficiently remove patent issue from our code.
>
>
> There is probably nothing Oracle can do to permanently harm us, but
> there are a variety of things they can do to temporarily slow us down,
> and it is likely a attempt will be made in the future. There are also
> possible threats to PostgreSQL support companies, though they are
> somewhat independent of the project.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
