<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><i>After sleeping on it an escrow does seem a bit too coercive for this context; kinda jumping the gun. It would really only be relevant if people were abusing an openness mark and the community wanted to make an extra effort to enforce standards.</i></span><br>
<div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><i><br></i></span></div><div style><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">It was only really suggested as a foil to be used with the ephemerally reluctant;</span></div>
<div style><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">a proof that if the principle of what we are doing really is important, as you may say it is, </span></div><div style><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">that there is always a way to fulfil the promise and provide the necessary proof through action.</span></div>
<div style><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></span></div><div style><font face="arial, sans-serif">The suggestion was never intended to be as a mandatory requirement.</font></div></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br clear="all"><div>_________________________________________<br>malcolm stanley<br><br>google.voice: 215.821.6252 <div>Cell: 267.251.9479 <------------- new<br>email: <a href="mailto:a.malcolm.stanley@gmail.com" target="_blank">a.malcolm.stanley@gmail.com</a><br>
twitter / linkedin: amstanley<br>Read my blog at <a href="http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com</a><br>_________________________________________</div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Matt Maier <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:blueback09@gmail.com" target="_blank">blueback09@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Okay, lets back up a bit. My impression was that we were discussing an OSHWA mark that the open hardware community could rely on as a guarantee of openness. More specifically, as a guarantee that a commercial project actually qualifies as open source. Nobody's worried about the hobby projects being open, they're worried about the for-profit projects (see Makerbot).<div>
<br></div><div>Is a self-selected openness-mark really going to accomplish anything? At the moment anybody can claim openness just by, you know, claiming it. They could write it on their PCB or inside their case if they felt like it. Would providing them with a professionally designed glyph to say the same thing make any difference?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems to me that only a curated openness mark can possibly achieve any level of value. The users want an objective assessment of a project's openness and the competing producers want a consistent standard. Anything short of that is ripe for the same "open washing" that inspired the discussion, right?</div>
<div><br></div><div>I agree that raises the level of commitment necessary from whatever organization wants to be in charge. But I don't see how anything short of that will make any difference. Besides, at the end of the day if a standards-based openness mark is a conflict of interest then maybe it's just not worth pursuing. </div>
<div><br></div><div>The escrow idea isn't an integral part of the openness mark idea. I just thought it could be useful. After sleeping on it an escrow does seem a bit too coercive for this context; kinda jumping the gun. It would really only be relevant if people were abusing an openness mark and the community wanted to make an extra effort to enforce standards.</div>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Tom Igoe <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tom.igoe@gmail.com" target="_blank">tom.igoe@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div>I see a few problems with that:<br>
<br>
* it implies that the files are done in advance of the product release. You really don't want to release half-baked files, even to escrow.<br>
<br>
* projects hit delays. You could say"we plan to release by x" and for various logistical reasons not be ready to release the product by x. Better to choose a goal than a date, e.g you'll release the files when the product goes on sale. That doesn't work for non- commercial members though.<br>
<br>
* who is responsible for maintaining the files in escrow? The oshwa board is made up of folks who both collaborate and compete with each other and other oshwa members. I trust them all because I know them personally. But is my experience universal? You're introducing a big potential conflict of unrest there.<br>
<br></div></div></blockquote></div></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@lists.oshwa.org">discuss@lists.oshwa.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>