[cc-community] Seeking open hardware advice
Jordan S Hatcher
jordan at opencontentlawyer.com
Fri Aug 20 08:08:49 EDT 2010
Two resources that may be of help:
-- I know that Andrew Katz of Moorcrofts in the UK has done some open hardware work and is very knowledgeable in open licensing issues. He might be able to help. <http://www.moorcrofts.com/>
-- if you or anyone else who is interested happen to be in London, the Open Source Hardware Users Group (OSHUG) has started in the past year and has some regular meetings <http://oshug.org/>
Thanks!
~Jordan
____
Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
More at: <http://www.jordanhatcher.com>
Co-founder: <http://www.opendatacommons.org>
Open Knowledge: <http://www.okfn.org/>
On 20 Aug 2010, at 01:45, Jeff Osier-Mixon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to find out the logical differences among open-source licenses, partly because I should know after this many years in the field, and partly because I would like to advise a hardware project on the best methods for both licensing and copyrighting their materials.
>
> The project is a small ARM-based single-board computer (http://beagleboard.org). The intent of the provider is that the board be "totally open", meaning OK to download the plans and modify, even to create commercial products, with attribution. They prefer that their logo not be a part of any derived works. That is basically it. These guys are TI engineers doing this project on their own time and get nothing from it other than the joy of helping to spread embedded systems love to the world.
>
> The website from which these materials flows also has a CC-BY-SA logo on the home page. There is a set of detailed design drawings (with no copyright marks) and a system reference guide (with a CC-BY-SA logo on the front). The "license" page itself contains just the disclaimer portion of a slightly modified BSD license, although as I said, that license does not appear in the materials themselves. The maintainers have considered and rejected the new Open Hardware License due to clause 3, which requires derived works to maintain the same license - they don't want to put that restriction on the board.
>
> So, in other words, the docs & materials are CC-BY-SA while the IP that defines the board is BSD-like. From what I have read, I believe what they need to do is:
>
> (1) put the CC-BY-SA logo on every page of all materials, drawings, documentation, etc. and on every page of the website
>
> (2) state in the front of each set of materials, drawings, documentation, etc. the language of the BSD-like license and what is covered by it - the specific ideas as expressed in the drawings and materials
>
> I would really like to help them get their licensing correct as the first step to forming a "real" dot-org. Am I on the right path?
>
> thanks
>
> Jeff
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20100820/be200fb2/attachment.html
More information about the cc-community
mailing list