> hack the source code to grant yourself access to our paid features without a subscription, or the use of modified versions in production.
I think the change that you can’t modify the code and use it yourself in production is a big change that is glossed over. ES is now free as in beer. You can look at the code but you can’t touch it or change what it does.
Edit: I was wrong about this. The license itself does not say this, but the blog post seemed to indicate that it was a change. I think it’s an exclusive inclusive or problem.
This is false. License [0] clearly states the conditions under which you can do it and they seem pretty reasonable. Nothing that a normal user, faced with an issue they want to fix, wouldn't accept. I imagine Amazon would have trouble accepting those and other terms, but that's the whole idea.
No, you are both correct. You are talking about the SSPL, the parent poster you are replying to is talking about the Elastic License which does in fact prevent you from modifying the code and running it in production:
With the dual-licensing you have a choice of Elastic license or SSPL, but they both have terms you might not like. And if you use the binaries you automatically use the free as in beer Elastic license.
I think the change that you can’t modify the code and use it yourself in production is a big change that is glossed over. ES is now free as in beer. You can look at the code but you can’t touch it or change what it does.
Edit: I was wrong about this. The license itself does not say this, but the blog post seemed to indicate that it was a change. I think it’s an exclusive inclusive or problem.