On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 5:20 PM Lewis, Ian (Microstar Laboratories) <
The real problem comes with our potential OEM and VAR customers - the most
valuable customers for our potential product from a turnover perspective.
If we attempt to sell them a GPL licensed product, we oblige them to
conform with GPL licensing to be able to sell their systems to their
customers. I am about certain that, unless we make it trivially easy to
conform, this will put off a good fraction of our prospective customers.
Even if we make it trivially easy to conform, unless it is almost
automatic, I am concerned that it may still put off too many potential
OEM/VAR customers. And, our customers would not be behaving in an
nonsensical way. Many of them employ no firmware engineers who they could
use to determine whether they were actually in compliance with GPL, even if
they did not mind the added licensing on their product.
how are you different in this case from Motorola, who had to put their
linux source on a web site? companies resold motorola phones. Or the many
switch vendors who sell network switches that run coreboot/linuxbios? or
irobot, who use it still on the packbot?
Or how are you different from just about every vendor that sells embedded
ARM boards that run u-boot?
Also, why do you mention GPL V3? Coreboot is 2 or later.
What about the many systems that run all kinds of GPL V2 embedded software?
What's different between you and them?
What I'm trying to say is that problem seems to have been solved. I get the
feeling you are new to dealing with this question, and are trying to solve
it yourself, without talking to people who have already solved it?