[Discuss] curious statement on github about oshwa certiification
contacto at emiliovelis.com
Sun Jul 3 16:22:03 UTC 2016
I wonder about that statement too. Good catch, Nancy. I don't understand
what kinds of civil lawsuits the person refers to. Perhaps if we write them
they can explain it a bit further...?
On 2 July 2016 at 23:56, Nancy Ouyang <nancy.ouyang at gmail.com> wrote:
> Err, was more wondering about the last phrase, "the only thing that
> certification adds to a project is increased liability to civil suits,"
> which I'm sure is a very unflattering portrayal of the value that
> certification adds, unless I'm very confused.
> On Jul 2, 2016 12:45 PM, "Matt Maier" <blueback09 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Everything is "explicitly not compliant" with the OSHWA certification by
>> default. You have to opt-in.
>> On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Nancy Ouyang <nancy.ouyang at gmail.com>
>>> "This project is open source in the sense that I legally permit people
>>> to do whatever they want with the source code, design drawings, etc.; and
>>> in the sense that I provide that information for them to do what they want.
>>> It is EXPLICITLY NOT COMPLIANT with the OSHWA Certification. It never will
>>> be, because the only thing that certification adds to a project is
>>> increased liability to civil suits. "
>>> Is this simply a complaint about copyleft vs public domain, or is there
>>> more to it? Haven't been following the certification draft (beta?)
>>> discussion, sorry -- does anyone have a link? skimmed oshwa.org and
>>> didn't see anything in particular (though saw a discussion about the design
>>> of the mark i think)
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss