[Discuss] Publish OSHW with CC0?

Thu Oct 30 15:25:29 UTC 2014

Best example of a catapult yet. Especially the part about the skulls.

WTFPL looks pretty cool - not saying you made this claim, but to be clear
for everyone on the list - that will still only protect your designs and
does not apply to the hardware itself.

Cheers
Alicia

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Tiberius Brastaviceanu <
tiberius.brastaviceanu at gmail.com> wrote:

> Interesting discussion, I learned something here.
> Within the www.sensorica.co network we have chosen to share hardware
> designs with CC BY.
>
> I think it depends on your goals. If the guy doesn't care about what might
> happen with his hardware, I guess it's fine. I like the spirit of WTFPL.
>
> I look at things from an economic perspective and I ask myself how to
> stimulate economic development, which means to increase the efficiency of
> processes like innovation, production, distribution... I work around
> commons-based peer production and I think that in order to stimulate
> innovation we need to let others modify and remix our work, but in order
> for this to function properly, we also need to put in place a feedback
> mechanism. This is why I think it is important to be able to find out who
> is using the design and what improvements others have made on it. The share
> alike clause is also important, because we don't want someone to modify or
> remix and close. We want this new economy based on sharing to spread,
> therefore it needs a viral aspect.
>
> So for me it's more than an individual thing. I do have a mission and I
> want things to fall into place in a way that encourage the emergence and
> development of commons-based peer production. I want us, as a global
> society, to become more effective and efficient.
>
> See more on the open value network model.
> http://valuenetwork.referata.com/wiki/Main_Page
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Mastro Gippo <gipmad at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I released some of my projects under the WTFPL, check it out.
>>
>> MG
>> On Oct 30, 2014 1:28 PM, "Michael Weinberg" <
>> mweinberg at publicknowledge.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I'll preface this by saying that I don't know the details of your
>>> friend's project so his mileage may vary and this is not legal advice.
>>> However, a few high level points worth keeping in mind:
>>>
>>> - CC0 (and all CC licenses) are copyright licenses.  Copyright is a
>>> default-on type of protection, so some sort of dedication (like CC0) is
>>> necessary if you want your copyright-protected work to be in the public
>>> domain.
>>>
>>> - Copyright does not protect everything. Specifically (in this case),
>>> copyright does not protect functional objects.  Functional objects fall
>>> within the scope of patent.  Unlike copyright, patent is a default-off type
>>> of protection.  If you  make a functional object, it is in the public
>>> domain automatically unless you protect it with a patent.  You don't need
>>> to take any additional steps to put it into the public domain.
>>>
>>> - What does this mean?  If I make a catapult, any non-functional designs
>>> on the catapult (skulls and whatnot) are protected by copyright.  Probably
>>> so are my schematics for the catapult.  But the catapult itself is not
>>> protected by copyright and is default in the public domain.  Putting a  CC0
>>> license on my schematic gives people the ability to copy the schematics
>>> freely, but has no impact on their ability to copy the catapult itself
>>> (because it is already in the public domain).
>>>
>>> -I don't know what "the public domain mark" is, but if it is only
>>> descriptive I don't know why it couldn't be applied equally to works that
>>> entered the public domain "naturally" (either because the copyright expired
>>> or because they were never protected by copyright/patent in the first
>>> place) or through some sort of dedication like CC0.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Antoine, as a contact of a free
>>> smallwindturbine project <smallwindturbineproj.contactor at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > to release an electronics device
>>>>
>>>> My understanding is: as your friend wants a tangible things and its
>>>> upstream and downstream manufacturing chain to be into public domain
>>>> (or equivalent), then, a CC licence can not really match.
>>>>
>>>> From my understanding, using a open licence specially designed for
>>>> tangible things would be preferable: TAPR or CERN-OHL.
>>>>
>>>> Don't you think ?
>>>>
>>>> Freely,
>>>>
>>>> Antoine
>>>>
>>>> 2014-10-30 6:13 UTC+01:00, Eric Thompson <eric at lowvoltagelabs.com>:
>>>> > I don't recall exactly what he said during the interview but I seem to
>>>> > remember that Ian from Dangerous Prototypes talked about this during
>>>> an
>>>> > interview on The Amp Hour podcast.
>>>> >
>>>> > If you look at the Bus Pirate documentation, it lists the PCB art and
>>>> > Firmware as CC-0.
>>>> > http://dangerousprototypes.com/docs/Bus_Pirate#License
>>>> >
>>>> > - Eric
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Drew Fustini <pdp7pdp7 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Hi, a friend at my hackerspace here in Chicago wants to release an
>>>> >> electronics device he's designed as OSHW.  It is a pure analog system
>>>> >> with no firmware.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> He doesn't care about attribution, commercial use, derivatives or
>>>> >> copyleft restrictions.   He said he basically wants to make the
>>>> design
>>>> >> public domain.  My understanding is that Creative Commons CC0 is
>>>> >> preferable to public domain.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Anyone have thoughts on releasing hardware designs as CC0?
>>>> >> Is there are better option given he doesn't want to reserve any
>>>> rights?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> thanks!
>>>> >> drew
>>>> >> http://keybase.io/pdp7
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> discuss mailing list
>>>> >> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>> >> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Weinberg, Vice President, PK Thinks
>>> 202-861-0020 (o) | @mweinbergPK
>>>
>>> Public Knowledge | @publicknowledge | www.publicknowledge.org
>>> 1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036 | CFC # 12259
>>>
>>> Promoting a Creative & Connected Future.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> t!b! <http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu>
> co-founder of SENSORICA <http://www.sensorica.co>,
> an open, decentralized and self-organizing
> value network (an open enterprise)
>
> founder of Multitude Project
> <https://sites.google.com/site/multitude2008/>
>
> Google Profile <https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about>
> Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu
> <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184>
> Twitter  @TiberiusB <http://twitter.com/TiberiusB>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20141030/3976a3fc/attachment-0001.html>