TBK

Copy Left violation

Recommended Posts

I wrote to FSF sometime ago already, but haven't got a reply. I think more of you should also email them about violation, so they will take it more seriously I guess.

 

You can find a basic template here: https://forum.synology.com/enu/viewtopi ... 74#p155474

LKooks like people have been having problems with no source released for many years already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wrote to FSF sometime ago already, but haven't got a reply. I think more of you should also email them about violation, so they will take it more seriously I guess.

 

Can you please publish here what you wrote them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the last reply I got:

Hi xxxxxxx,

 

Thanks for your feedback.

 

Synology has been always trying to release the GPL source code with the latest fixes while maintaining a good quality of the output.

While the development team has been occupied by several major projects, we have started working on the refactoring of the code and comment to make it more suitable for the audiences.

 

And thanks for the reminder of GNU GPL v2 license, I will consult it with our legal counselor.

 

Thanks again for contacting us and we will make the GPL source code as soon as it's ready for public use.

 

Best regards,

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Synology Inc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a typical canned response from businesses trying to get you off their tail.

 

Now based on that, if I'm reading properly in between the lines it sounds something like:

:???:

"Our Devs are busy writing the code from the grounds up avoiding the use of any open source codes, when they are done with the new closed code OS, we will release whatever bits and pieces of code that would have no use at all for the community, so you can stop duplicating our work, and any further reverse engineering of DSM will be met with our legal team."

 

until that day happens, I'll stick with DSM for any home made file server :grin:

in the very worse case scenario, migrate back to FreeBSD, Ubuntu , Fedora, Nas4Free, FreeNAS, etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wrote to FSF sometime ago already, but haven't got a reply. I think more of you should also email them about violation, so they will take it more seriously I guess.

 

Can you please publish here what you wrote them?

 

Dear FSF,

I would like to report violation of the GPL license by the Synology Inc.

The company details are:
Synology Inc.
3F-3, No.106, Chang An W. Rd.,
Taipei 10351,
Taiwan
Tel: +886 2 2552 1814
https://www.synology.com

They are producer of a Network Attached Storage (NAS) devices and are also developer of a Disk Station Manager (DSM) software that is used to run their NAS devices. DSM is based on Linux kernel and other works released under GPL license.

They release open source of the required parts of their software on Sourceforge page: https://sourceforge.net/projects/dsgpl/files/  Unfortunately, releases of open source are never up to date and it takes them months after their new version of DSM goes into live production until they release sources.

As we can see from their release notes (available at https://www.synology.com/en-us/releaseNote/DS3615xs), version 7321 was released on the 24th of March 2016, while sources have not been released yet and it's already 19th of May. Not to mention that many versions' sources were never released.


I was informed that people have reported them to you on multiple ocasions in the past already (dating back as far as 2011), and the company is still following the same practices while making big money out of it. Synology Inc. was recently contacted by one of the community members asking them to release the lastest source and they said that they are not ready to release it yet for some reason ... which is not acceptable.

If you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting reading guys, thanks for this.

Hopefully Synology releases the surce code soon, so we cah upgrade to DSM6.

Until that happens, I am totally happy with the latest version.

I have tried freenas, openmediavault, Zyxel Real NAS, QNAP, ubuntu server custom made NAS and more, but hands down, Synology is the best out there for SOHO.

And the devs are making it possible for us to buil our own hardwer using the best OS ever made for SOHO NAS-es.

Big big big thanks to all of those involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've mailed Synology and I've filled a violation complaint with FSF.

 

In the mail to Synology I've asked them for a release date of the Source code. I also told them about the complaint filled with FSF.

 

Fingers crossed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider reminding these excerpt from their GPL Licence published at synology website:

 

Conveying Non-Source Forms.

(...)

 

b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.

 

and then remind the consequence of not doing so :

 

8. Termination.

 

You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License (including any patent licenses granted under the third paragraph of section 11).

 

Therefore, seems like their DSM 6.0 is actually without a GPL licence that has been terminated.... !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They know what the license says, but they also know we can't do anything about it; only the copyright holder can. They should really declare war on Synology because Synology ihas been intentionally breaking the license for years, while making a huge profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They know what the license says, but they also know we can't do anything about it; only the copyright holder can. They should really declare war on Synology because Synology ihas been intentionally breaking the license for years, while making a huge profit.

 

The same goes for about any Chinese company that uses Android as well. None of them follow the rules...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They know what the license says, but they also know we can't do anything about it; only the copyright holder can. They should really declare war on Synology because Synology ihas been intentionally breaking the license for years, while making a huge profit.

 

The same goes for about any Chinese company that uses Android as well. None of them follow the rules...

 

yup!, Synology is actually a Chinese (Taiwan) company according to its registration, then we have ASUS, Acer, Gigabyte, MSI, Razer, Logitech, HTC and ... well pretty much all the big brand names in the PC and Android market are all from Mainland China, or Taiwan China, and it's true they do not follow any of the GPL open source requirements.

 

It's very hard to get them to cooperate (follow rules).

 

Samsung (South Korean) follow rules, but they are always behind schedule, you have to ask them many times before they release the source codes for their android devices.

 

Qnap is also headquaters in Taiwan (at least Qnap have a proper GPL source code page like Samsung)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They know what the license says, but they also know we can't do anything about it; only the copyright holder can. They should really declare war on Synology because Synology ihas been intentionally breaking the license for years, while making a huge profit.

 

Their primary markets isn't China it's Europe and North America and they require distribution to sell their products in those markets. If the copyright holders can't get satisfaction directly they can always pursue the distributors within the countries that do respect the licensing.

 

If distribution is halted Synology can't move their product unless they meet their obligations to the copyright holders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yup!, Synology is actually a Chinese (Taiwan) company according to its registration, then we have ASUS, Acer, Gigabyte, MSI, Razer, Logitech, HTC and ... well pretty much all the big brand names in the PC and Android market are all from Mainland China, or Taiwan China, and it's true they do not follow any of the GPL open source requirements.

 

Just to clarify Logitech is from Swiss and Razor is from the USA.

 

 

I stumbled upon this website http://gpl-violations.org/ which might be useful in our fight.

 

 

As far as I see now the only option we have is to get one of the Linux kernel developers (has to have contributed to kernel 3.10.77) to file a law suite against Synology in EU (countries like Germany and the Netherlands are preferred) or the USA.

 

Does anybody know the "right" mailing list to use to get hold of kernel developers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we could also get in touch with some bloggers that write articles about stuff like that. Would be funny, that when you searched "Synology" in Google, you would get results about license violations, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Synology's answer on my claim that they are in voilation of the GPL License,

 

Thank you for contacting Synology.

I can assure you that we are not in violation of the General Public Licenses as there no stipulation on 'when' the source code for newer versions of DSM have to be released, only that the open source parts must be made public. To that extent, we are fully aware of our obligations and at this moment in time I do not have a precise date to provide you with. 

I can only advise you that once the source code is released it will be made available via our usual open source project locations e.g. https://sourceforge.net/projects/dsgpl/ 

 

Basically they are giving customers the middlefinger.... :roll: ...and we just need the wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is Synology's answer on my claim that they are in voilation of the GPL License,

 

Thank you for contacting Synology.

I can assure you that we are not in violation of the General Public Licenses as there no stipulation on 'when' the source code for newer versions of DSM have to be released, only that the open source parts must be made public. To that extent, we are fully aware of our obligations and at this moment in time I do not have a precise date to provide you with. 

I can only advise you that once the source code is released it will be made available via our usual open source project locations e.g. https://sourceforge.net/projects/dsgpl/ 

 

Basically they are giving customers the middlefinger.... :roll: ...and we just need the wait.

 

 

I think a big part of the problem here is they do not consider us, "customers." We can say we have owned and/or do own actual Synology boxes as much as we want but Synology likely views us more like bums begging for them to give us "their", product for free so we can install it on our basement devices. They do not look at us as a revenue source so as far as they are concerned we can pretty well f*ck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the point that customers get the code. GPL means General Public License and it's purpose is that the public/anybody interested can learn from the code that somebody wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is Synology's answer on my claim that they are in voilation of the GPL License,

 

Thank you for contacting Synology.

I can assure you that we are not in violation of the General Public Licenses as there no stipulation on 'when' the source code for newer versions of DSM have to be released, only that the open source parts must be made public. To that extent, we are fully aware of our obligations and at this moment in time I do not have a precise date to provide you with. 

I can only advise you that once the source code is released it will be made available via our usual open source project locations e.g. https://sourceforge.net/projects/dsgpl/ 

 

Basically they are giving customers the middlefinger.... :roll: ...and we just need the wait.

 

What they are writing is a blatant lie in accordance with:

a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

 

Source: https://opensource.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at Qnap, they released there source code 4 months after the release of QTS4.2.0.

Let's just hope Synology will not take a long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.