I’m sure most of it is trademark preservation. Trademarks are enforce it or lose it.

You can enforce by requiring an agreement, and making the terms reasonable enough that an OSS project can agree to them (this isn't entirely easy, but it's not that hard either).

Also, there's the thing where these other projects have been using the name since forever, so there's already a history of non-enforcement.

▲

stult 7 months ago | parent [-]

The best time to start enforcing their trademark (from a legal perspective) was ten years ago. The second best time is now. Negotiating many agreements with many OSS projects is a lot of legal work which they may not want to pay for. And none of this undermines my original point that their primary motivation is probably just trademark preservation. That they did a poor job previously doesn’t mean they aren’t trying to do better now, and that they could use less aggressive methods doesn’t mean they aren’t primarily focused on trademark preservation. It’s the simple explanation. Occam’s razor.

▲

Tostino 7 months ago | parent [-]

You mean the trademark that wasn't filed until 2018[0]?

That is part of it....these projects are older than the trademark, by quite a bit.

[0]: https://trademarks.justia.com/878/05/redis-87805452.html

▲

stult 7 months ago | parent [-]

I don’t know why you think you are dunking on me here, I’m not saying they are right, just what their likely motive is.

	▲	Tostino 7 months ago \| parent [-]
		It wasn't intended as a dunk. Was just trying to add a bit more context to the situation.