Reserved instances are simply a pricing construct. You're paying upfront for up to 24/7 usage, but you're running on the same pool as the standard instance. Dedicated instances, on the other hand, do what you're talking about but they're much pricier:
They own the copyright to the code: they can do what they want with it. The licence is only a restriction on what people who don't own it can do.
Also, the GPLv3 is not the same thing as the AGPL. Even if they didn't own the code, if it was only GPL then they could make changes without making those available since they were not distributing the software (assuming this was just a webapp). The AGPL closes that loophole.
Copyright licenses apply to third parties, not owners.
The GPLv3 compels entities other than the copyright holder to make available source code to those who receive non-source code versions of software, if they are actually distributing the software or "offer access" to the work (e.g.: as a Web app). The copyright holder him or herself, whether by authorship or assignment, has no such obligations. Third parties would, as would the project maintainer if that maintainer accepted third-party contributions without assignment.
If the Knight Foundation grant required continual availability in open source form, that would be a different contractual obligation under the grant.
Just because this code is released under GPLv3 it doesn't mean that the main codebase is GPLv3. They have complete ownership of their own code & can do as they will with it. The GPL only controls the rights of other people that want to use it.
I was on the site nearly every day and poured hours of my life writing community posts, updating information, etc. This may not mean much to people outside of Chicago, but stuff like the epic debate between Eddie Carazana and Jim DeRogatis on the future of the Congress Theater, gone forever?
The fact that this code is not current is extremely surprising, actually. It's GPLV3-licensed, so my somewhat uninformed expectation is that MSNBC would be obligated to open-source any derivative works? Unless they did a complete rewrite of the codebase at some point.
I created a petition asking MSNBC to open-source the latest codebase and also release the user-generated content to the public domain:
From GPLV3: "One of the fundamental requirements of the GPL is that when you distribute object code to users, you must also provide them with a way to get the source."
Presumably MSNBC didn't distribute object code to users, in which case they have no obligation to open-source any derivative work.
MSNBC really screwed the pooch on this one, from their initial "open source" via zipfile, to the zero-day shutdown. Not what the Knight Foundation intended to fund with their open source requirements.
Per another thread of discussion, apparently the rules of the GPL do not apply to the licensor, only the licensee. If MSNBC accepted OSS community contributions to the Everyblock codebase, they might be in violation. But if it was a one-way offering, they can apparently still retain full rights. I imagine the initial Mozilla-Knight foundation grant makes this a bit more complex, but IANAL.
Anyone can take a piece of GPL'd software and modify it as much as they'd like for their own use. There is absolutely no requirement to publish or "contribute back" those changes. (Think, for example, about Amazon customizing or modifying Xen for EC2. They do not have to publish their modified code or share it with "the community".)
If, however, you share binary/compiled/etc. forms of your modifications, you are then required to make the source code available.
As a follow-up to myself, if you are the copyright holder you can do whatever you'd like with the code including, for example, dual licensing.
Many, many years ago (I'm not sure if this is still true (I doubt it)), MySQL was dual-licensed. It was free for personal use, for example, but if you wanted to 1) use it commercially or 2) run it on Windows, you had to pay.
Perl, AFAIK, is still dual-licensed under the GPL and the Artistic License.
But the last update was June 2009, nearly three years ago.
It would also be a shame for the user content to be lost forever. Some of us poured tens or hundreds of hours of our lives into community discussions. It should be a part of the public record.
A recruiter phishing for hiring managers maybe? But I would suspect this is legit and totally above-board. This is part of what online communities are all about.
I love both Solr and ElasticSearch but the big missing comparison for me is: are there any books available? Or even comprehensive tutorials beyond the basics? I love ElasticSearch but it was a huge pain getting up-to-speed on everything. Figuring out things like EdgeNGrams (something I already knew how to do in Solr and Lucene) meant digging into the source code. I'm not shy about doing that myself, but giving that advice to a consulting client would be a non-starter. With the explosive growth of ES just in the last year or two, it's really time for someone to start working on a book. Packt, Manning, O'Reilly, any news?
Thanks Jeremy, Shan and Mike. I'm continually blown away by the data journalism you're doing over at nytimes on the election. It's truly an inspiration.
It's a really nice project. There are some routes that are surprising and yet seem possible in reality. Those explain some of the choices the candidates have been making, particularly with "safe" states they can't really afford to ignore completely.
We're really looking forward to seeing what you've got in store on Tuesday.
It's been a while since the Interactive News Team profile a few years back; I think we'd all like to know how a major night goes down in the newsroom for your team.
http://aws.amazon.com/dedicated-instances/