MariaDB is not much if any better - Ok, I can see his original point - he shared the source to MySQL so that he could get the benefits of community bugfixing, but retained the commercial rights so that he could sell commercial usage licences and still make money.
I can also see how, when offered a buttload of money by SUN, he could get up front and in one lump sum what he might make in years of normal trading - and SUN, having no db solution of its own to compete, was as good a new owner as any.
However, with MariaDB he is trying to have his cake and eat it too - he wishes to start a new "community" edition of MySQL so he can still steer the project, despite having taken his pieces of silver and ran once already. Despite (or even because of) his "experience" in running the MySQL project, I would not consider him a particularly good choice to control a fork.
You don't get to tell a search provider how they are supposed to use the content they index from you. I am ok with the idea that you should be able to tell them not to index you, if you don't want that done, but if you choose to be indexed you don't get to say "You can only do it in the way we specify, or using the terms we specify."
Actually, that plays to a second danger. If you can get a court order like this, then presumably at some point they can convince a Belgian judge that "Official Belgian newspapers" should automagically get a higher rating on news.google.be than foreign/unofficial ones... Google search results could end up ordered by lawsuit rank not pagerank
It is masked but always present. I don't know who built to it. It came before the first kernel.