I imagine legally would need a lawsuit to set a precedence, and if a license owner sets an over-reaching precedence of what a wrapper is, they risk losing customer trust and companies avoiding them like the plague.
e.g. timescaledb going after a tsdb as a service company offering tsdb behind a graphql wrapper vs timescaledb going after a financial company offering timeseries data collection and viewing.
I think a good border test would be, would timescaledb allow you to offer a metrics and logging service? technically you're offering timeseries database functionality, but it's in a constrained domain, and very clearly a different product, but still effectively CRUDing timeseries data.
That’s the internal use restriction. There is also the restriction more relevant to the use cases I’m talking about on Value Added Products which is “the customer is prohibited, either contractually or technically, from defining, redefining, or modifying the database schema or other structural aspects of database objects”.
Which is, basically, saying that you can do anything that doesn’t give your customers the ability to redefine and modify the database schema as long as you are creating a product that is adding value on top of timescale. Is any of this 100% clear? Not any more that legalese generally is, and of course probably wise to talk to a lawyer if you’re concerned about it. Timescale has made their intent with the license clear in the past with blog posts and such though.
Legally, what's a wrapper? Is a REST API a wrapper?