On the issue of open source license compliance, even if undetected, it is still necessary to proactively correct errors and comply with license requirements. The following are the key reasons and suggestions： --- ###**1. Necessity at the legal and ethical level** 1. **Legal risks** - The open source license is legally binding, and violation constitutes infringement (whether intentional or not). Even if undetected, the company still faces potential litigation risks, including compensation, injunctions, and even open source of the entire project (such as the GPL infectious clause). -Some licenses (such as Apache-2.0, MIT) only require the retention of the copyright notice, but if they are not fulfilled, they may still be held liable for infringement. 2. **Ethical responsibility** -The open source ecosystem depends on the mutual trust between contributors and users. Illegal use will destroy community trust and damage the company's reputation. --- ###**2. Undetected≠ the risk is zero** 1. **Concealment issues** -Code audits, employee resignations, partner reviews, or future open source projects may expose violations. -Automated tools (such as Fossil) can scan the code base to increase the probability of exposure. 2. **Long-term cost** -Delayed correction may lead to deepening of code dependence and higher refactoring costs in the future. --- ###**Three, the recommended solution steps** 1. **Immediately stop illegal use** -Remove or replace code that does not comply with the license, or strictly fulfill license obligations (such as open source derivative works, retention notices, etc.). 2. **Internal review and compliance process** -Establish an open source usage list and clarify the license and compliance requirements for each component. -Introduce tools (such as SCA) to automatically detect dependency compliance. 3. **Proactive correction and remedy** - Contact the original developer or community to reissue a statement, apologize, or negotiate remedial measures. -If multiple licenses such as the GPL are involved, it is necessary to evaluate whether part of the project's code must be open source. 4. **Legal advice** -Work with intellectual property lawyers to assess risks and develop compliance plans. --- ###**Fourth, exceptions** -**Code without a clear copyright notice or license**: Its source needs to be carefully verified, and it may belong to the ”no license" status (it is protected by copyright by default and cannot be used at will). --- ###**Summary** Compliance is not an option, but a legal obligation. Proactive error correction can minimize future risks and maintain corporate reputation. The healthy development of the open source ecosystem depends on the sense of responsibility of each participant, and short-term convenience cannot offset potential long-term losses.