[Discuss] OSHW Best Practices / Layers of Openness

[Massimo Menichinelli]

Hi all,
I've missed somehow this mailing list before, so I'm jumping in the 
discussion right now.
About the Open Design Definition: when we started the Open Design 
Working Group at the Open Knowledge Foundation (http://design.okfn.org) 
we weren't satisfied with the Open Design Definition written in 2000, 
before that Open Design actually developed and that just changed the 
word "software" into "design" from the Open Source Definition (which is 
great, but software and design are not the same thing, so we should 
discuss a bit before adopting everything).

Furthermore, many definitions directly addressed one or more license 
for the open content, but the IP landscape for design is very 
complicated (each country has its own laws, different design fields are 
treated in a different way, and so on) so it is very difficult to say 
that there's a license for Open Design (CC only applies when design can 
be copyrighted, therefore not always). So the idea was to develop a 
shared definition of Open Design before discussing the issue of the 
license.

We are developing the Open Design Definition in an open source way with 
a repository in GitHub and a mailing list:
https://github.com/OpenDesign-WorkingGroup/Open-Design-Definition
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/opendesign
http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/opendesign/

Please feel free to open an issue in the repository or to join our 
mailing list! :)
If you would like to join the team behind the repository, send me your 
GitHub username and I will add you.

I hope I can help by bringing some Open Design discussion in this list! 
:)

Br,

Massimo

On 2013-02-27 20:38, Alicia Gibb wrote:
>
> - This movement feels like you're leaving out mechanical designs /
> architecture / nanotech, how can I interpret your definition to
> include my projects? (This comes to us a lot, which perhaps
> prompted Catarina to start exploring a space that would better 
> include
> them.)
>
>> r:rgb(255,255,255)">To start addressing this problem, we contacted 
>> Massimo Menichenelli and hope that he joins the conversation. He's 
>> working on an Open Design Definition [1], which relates closely to the 
>> oshw definition. Maybe we could combine be
>  somehow partner or nest the definitions, as I think the oshw
> definition was heavily based on the open design definition  written 
> in
> 2000 [3]? 
>

>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> 
> http://www.openp2pdesign.org/2013/open-design/working-on-the-open-design-definition/
> [2] http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> [3] http://opendesign.org/odd.html
> [4]
> 
> http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Why-it-s-time-to-stop-using-open-source-licences-1802140.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss

-- 
______________________________________________________________________
Massimo Menichinelli
mobile: (ITA) +39 3402971655 (FIN) +358 505981442
Skype: openp2pdesign.org
http://it.linkedin.com/in/massimomenichinelli
______________________________________________________________________
openp2pdesign.org
Metadesign for Open Systems, Processes, Projects
http://www.openp2pdesign.org/
______________________________________________________________________
Aalto University
Aalto Media Factory - Aalto FabLab (Producer for the FabLab activities)
http://mediafactory.aalto.fi/
http://fablab.aalto.fi/
______________________________________________________________________