<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><br><div><div>On 22 May 2014, at 20:05, Matt Maier <<a href="mailto:blueback09@gmail.com">blueback09@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;">Open source hardware needs an area of law which allows for the same kind of cheap and broad coverage of copyright. But there's nothing we can "hack" to get that coverage (like copyleft) and there's nothing on the horizon.</span></blockquote></div><br><div>I dare to disagree … a robust (whatever that will look like) defensive publication instrument, maybe even accompanied by a waiver, might be an interesting approach.</div></body></html>