[Discuss] OSHW Best Practices / Layers of Openness

Alicia Gibb pip at nycresistor.com
Thu Feb 28 15:53:14 UTC 2013

Welcome Massimo! Thanks for joining us, I have as well joined the open
design definition making list.

Tom, you are absolutely right, holding the enclosures to a different
standard does make them  more of a second class citizen. Thanks for
pointing out my bias. In that case, if there is no layering or partially
open differentiation, then I'd think the enclosure also must be open as the
stuff inside.

For the examples at hand, I think Marco said it best in one of his earlier
posts. If you have designed something and choose not to release those files
then it us proprietary, but if you're using someone else's proprietary
parts that other people can buy on the market, then those are attainable
and would not stop people from re-creating your device. I think it's good
to go back to the question of remanufacturing. Can someone remanufacture
all those examples above? I think yes.

On Feb 28, 2013 6:25 AM, "Massimo Menichinelli" <info at openp2pdesign.org>

> 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<https://github.com/OpenDesign-WorkingGroup/Open-Design-Definition>
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/**listinfo/opendesign<http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/opendesign>
> http://lists.okfn.org/**pipermail/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/<http://www.openp2pdesign.org/2013/open-design/working-on-the-open-design-definition/>
>> [2] http://lists.oshwa.org/**listinfo/discuss<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<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<http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss>
> --
> ______________________________**______________________________**__________
> Massimo Menichinelli
> mobile: (ITA) +39 3402971655 (FIN) +358 505981442
> Skype: openp2pdesign.org
> http://it.linkedin.com/in/**massimomenichinelli<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/
> ______________________________**______________________________**__________
> ______________________________**_________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/**listinfo/discuss<http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20130228/2d2dcb20/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list