[Discuss] OSHW Best Practices / Layers of Openness

Andrew Orr andrew at andreworr.ca
Thu Feb 28 16:34:11 UTC 2013

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Alicia Gibb <pip at nycresistor.com> wrote:

> 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.

I agree 100% with this.

Basically the way I see it is anything that *I* produce that I want to toss
the OSHW logo on, should be open. To me that means the hardware design
files (gerbers and originals), the BOM, and the source to any mcu or hdl
code that I wrote should all be made available (if I want to put the logo
on a PCB). This validates as per the "Can someone remanufacture?" question.

I'm not claiming that the mcu I use is open hardware, nor am I claiming
that the commercial enclosure I use is open hardware. What I am claiming by
putting the OSHW logo on a pcb is that the pcb I designed and the software
I wrote for it is open and I'm providing the files to back that up.

The whole goal to me with open source hardware and software is being able
to "stand on the shoulders of giants", that is, build on the work of
others, and let them build on my work. I think the "Can someone
remanufacture?" question encompasses this.

I also would like to add that I think a payment/license to use the OSHW
logo is silly, but at the same time donating to OSHWA should be made easier
(arbitrary amounts separate from membership dues).

Also I'd like to say thanks to everyone who's putting time/work into this,
it is much appreciated!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20130228/ebcb995b/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list