[Discuss] Free Hardware

[Emilio Velis]

Not to mention the lack of viability in most cases of jumping right into
that definition without any context. I think that any 'free' endeavor of
the sort should not be derived from a philosophical standpoint on
intangibles, but rather on the study of philosophy behind private property
(perhaps an anti-Lockean view). Drawing a software-hardware parallel is
confusing to say the least.

On 11 March 2015 at 13:57, Drew Fustini <pdp7pdp7 at gmail.com> wrote:

> hmm, just saw this on Slashdot:
> "Why We Need Free Digital Hardware Designs"
>
> http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/15/03/11/1648243/why-we-need-free-digital-hardware-designs
>
> Links to Wired:
> http://www.wired.com/2015/03/need-free-digital-hardware-designs/
>
> It appears to me that Richard Stallman wrote this article.
>
> Here is a quote:
> "the concept we really need is that of a free hardware design. That’s
> simple: it means a design that permits users to use the design (i.e.,
> fabricate hardware from it) and to copy and redistribute it, with or
> without changes. The design must provide the same four freedoms that
> define free software."
>
> I do like the philosophy behind it, but I am afraid the introduction
> of the term "Free Hardware" will increase confusion about hardware
> licensing.
>
> cheers,
> drew
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150311/ae8333b1/attachment.html>