[hashrate]

> if what you sell is basically the functionality of the module [...] Commons Clause does not allow it.

Great ! Now the entire industry is accepting the "freemium" model where the core features are free , but not the modules around it.

This is a push to milk companies with paid licences on Free Software. This is insane that this is becoming the norm in the industry.

Every single day open source is getting less and less open. This type of constraints are insane and are similar to the one forced by Oracle.

[sonarlunar]

It's one vendor contributing some modules which now they have a different license.

I don't see how this impacts any other Redis module on github out there.

Either those modules are that good and the vendor decides that cloud providers must pay and not get money from the vendor's work, or those modules are not really that used so who cares.

I have used RedisJSON module which is nice and I assume changes license now. Am I a service provider? Do I care about one module changing license so AWS and other clouds cannot use for their own service?

I couldn't care less and it does not impact Redis open source project at all IMHO

[hashrate]

> I couldn't care less

Let's say you are PHP consultant , you set up a Redis + EC2 instances.

You enable a redis enterprise module in that instance.

Well technically speaking you are breaching the license of RedisLabs. You are not allowed to do so without their consent because those modules aren't "bsd" or "mit" they are "Commons Clause".

In short , if you are doing something with the RedisLabs modules ( consulting / hosting / training / support ) you owe $$$ to RedisLabs.