[Discuss] curious statement on github about oshwa certiification

[Nancy Ouyang]

To avoid further confusion -- we may want to refresh the main
http://www.oshwa.org/ site,

   - *clarify certification vs license -- *it's worrisome that the
   certification program is already confusing people about what the license is
   :(
   - *clearly and prominently show people where to ask questions --* this
   should be present on ALL pages
      - perhaps simply add this email address to the header banner image

(I understand though, too many things to do for too few volunteers!)

~~~
my personal blog <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Nancy Ouyang <nancy.ouyang at gmail.com> wrote:

> Update: turned out, occam's razor, it was a simple case of confusing the
> certification for the license. See my previous email when it gets released
> from moderation :)
>
> ~~~
> my personal blog <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Nancy Ouyang <nouyang at mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> Update: I emailed and got an awesome reply -- here are the relevant
>> complaints.
>> Happy to "user interview" more to understand where the *misconceptions*
>> arose:
>>
>> My beef with the OSHW license is that if you license something as OSHW
>>> under that license, you don't get anything. It doesn't add anything to
>>> the technical work, it doesn't get you funding, etc. At the same time,
>>> if you fail to comply with the licensing requirements, they list an
>>> escalating scale of penalties
>>> (
>>> http://www.oshwa.org/2015/09/19/open-source-hardware-certification-version-1/
>>> , bottom of the page) they intend to impose on non-complying projects.
>>> So in exchange for nothing, you can get penalties. This is not
>>> something I want to be on the receiving end of, so I'm explicitly not
>>> using that licensing.
>>> Of course, I'd be happy if people adopted, copied, even sold the
>>> hardware (then I could buy it instead of making it myself :-), so I
>>> publish all the docs and whatnot, and encourage their use.
>>
>>
>> *I spot a two key misconceptions:*
>> 1) license = certification
>> 2) you are stuck in the certificaiton program and can't "leave at any
>> time" to avoid penalties
>>
>> ~~~
>> narwhaledu.org, educational robots
>> <http://gfycat.com/ExcitableLeanAkitainu> [[<(._.)>]] my personal blog
>> <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Matt Joyce <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:
>>
>>> GPL v3 is specifically 'viral'. In so far as it infects attached /
>>> derivative code. Different issue. I would think.
>>>
>>> On July 3, 2016 5:44:08 PM EDT, "j. eric townsend" <
>>> jet at functionalprototype.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  On Jul 3, 2016, at 01:56, 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Two disclaimers:
>>>>
>>>> - I am not a lawyer and this is not legal opinion.
>>>>
>>>> - I worked at TiVo for 10 years (left several years ago) and had the previous disclaimer pounded in to my thick skull. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Based on the confusion I’ve seen with lawyers, GPL v3, and using emacs to write software I suspect there might be a fear (without standing?) that open source software + commercial hardware can somehow create an open source hardware product.   I have rec
>>>>  eived
>>>> legal instruction from a potential client to not use any GPL v3 software — not even emacs to edit text files — on their project because their fear it would make their product also GPL v3.  (I ended up not taking that contract.)
>>>>
>>>> That sounded a bit odd to me at the time, but Apple is cleaning v3 (and v2) software from each release of OS X:
>>>> <http://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/>.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> J. Eric Townsend, IDSA
>>>> designer | engineer | fabricator
>>>> jet at functionalprototype.com
>>>> PGP 0x9D6F2CB8
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20160707/07b824cb/attachment-0001.html>