Hello Branden, Thank you so much for your detailed advice. We will review this issue with our lawyer.
Thank you again. Regards, Jiyoung 2024년 2월 6일 (화) 오후 8:23, G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > Hi there, > > I'd address you with an honorific and your surname, but I am too > ignorant to infer correct ones from the name shown in your email. I'm > sorry about that. > > At 2024-02-06T19:03:41+0900, Jiyoung Wee wrote: > > I have a request about Debian License Policy. > > > > This is our case. > > 1. For the OS for our appliance product, we use "A" OS(tentative name). > > 2. "A" OS is based on Debian OS. > > 3. We only modify "lsb_release" information so that the OS name,"A" OS, > > shows instead of Debian OS when commanded. > > 4. We install PSU, RAID, NIC drivers on the OS. > > 5. Other than that, we do not customize Debian OS. > > 6. We sell our appliance product to end-users. > > > > Do we have the right to use Debian OS freely based on the GNU General > > Public License? Would you please guide us whether we are using the > > Debian OS illegally or not? > > I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice, but I did work > alongside others in FLOSS licensing compliance team for several years > for a Silicon Valley company with a recognizable name, in an advisory > engineering capacity to the firm's legal counsel. Do not expect > anything any non-attorney, including me, tells you to reduce your > liability or exposure to damages in the event you fail, or are found by > a court to have failed, to honor the terms of the GNU General Public > License (GPL) and other copyright licenses--there are many--under which > the software in the Debian system is distributed. > > The first thing I will say is that if you are going to operate in a > commercial capacity in the United States, I cannot urge you strongly > enough to obtain competent legal counsel with relevant training and/or > experience in copyright law. The Debian Project is not licensed to > practice law, and you are asking for legal advice. > > Pretty much the same goes for any other jurisdiction you might be > operating in. Attorneys-at-law licensed to practice in the places where > you do business are the people from whom you should be obtaining answers > to your questions. > > That established, as an educated lay person I will offer you some nudges > in what I believe to be "the right direction". (Bear in mind that free > advice is worth what you pay for it.) > > Points 1, 2, and 3 seem less likely than the others to lead to problems. > Differentiating your product by name in the marketplace is a good idea > under trademark law, a subject for which you should _also_ obtain > competent counsel. Copyright and trademark law are distinct matters. > > Point 5 is worth noting. Understand that (as a rule) refraining from > modifications does not release you from your obligation to provide > complete corresponding source code to those portions of the product that > are licensed under the GNU GPL or a similar copyleft. Claiming that you > got a program in binary form from someplace else and did not change it > does not shift your responsibility elsewhere. You still must supply > complete corresponding source code, including scripts used to direct the > compilation and assembly of things like binary product, such as firmware > images flashed to an embedded device, where source code licensed under > GNU GPL, and some other licenses, is involved. > > Point 6 is also worthy of comment. Whether you convey copyrighted code > to another party in exchange for payment generally does not reduce your > obligations under copyright law or license. This principle is not > restricted to things like Free/Libre/Open Source software (FLOSS) > licenses; it goes just as well for Blu-Ray discs of Hollywood films. > Your civil and/or criminal liability is not necessarily diminished if > you do not profit by your activity. Your commercial exploitation of > material copyrighted by third parties, however, _could_ increase the > damages assessed you in the event of a civil lawsuit. > > Point 4 is the most noteworthy because in my opinion it is the most > potentially hazardous yet also most easily overlooked. Everything I've > said above that applies to FLOSS software also applies to proprietary > binary drivers (or "blobs"). These are, generally, copyrightable as > well, and frequently under restrictive terms; their owners may regard > their source code as a trade secret. You must not only be mindful of > combining them with materials licensed under so-called "strong > copylefts" like the GNU GPL (which may be impossible without infringing > one copyright license or the other), but also of the terms under which > you received them from your supplier, whose contract with you or terms > of sale may be particularized to your firm. I've already said that you > need a lawyer to answer these questions, and the point is even more > emphatic for this case. > > I would add, given popular misconceptions in the industry, that even if > you avoid "copyleft" licenses entirely, meaning any license that imposes > an obligation to disclose source code, there remain numerous FLOSS > projects whose licenses, while more "permissive", still require the > disclosure of their presence and attribution of correct copyright > notices in product documentation (or in the product itself). I recall > that at least one applicable civil case has been litigated on this > point, and won by the plaintiffs. (If someone on debian-project can > help me remember which case(s) I'm thinking of, I'd appreciate the > reminder.) > > If you distribute materials held in copyright by another party, you need > advice from a copyright lawyer, full stop. > > I recommend studying the following article, particularly if you need to > convince someone in your commercial enterprise to initiate a line item > in the budget for legal services, and they have been reluctant to do so. > > https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/16/vizio_gpl_contract/ > > I repeat: you need professional legal counsel to answer your questions. > > I do not warrant that any of my colleagues in Debian will agree with me. > However, I did present on this topic at a Debian conference and escaped > the room without damage from hurled vegetable matter. > > https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/226/ > > Best of luck in your endeavors! > > Regards, > Branden >
