[time-nuts] TAPR Open HArdware License -- Public Comment Period

John Ackermann N8UR jra at febo.com
Mon Feb 12 13:51:34 EST 2007


One big difference between hardware and software is that copyright 
licensing, which is what the BSD and other software licenses do, isn't 
very useful since copyright extends only to the expression of an idea, 
and not the idea itself.

As a result, simply copyrighting a schematic doesn't allow you to 
control someone making a product based on that schematic.  It requires a 
very different approach, which is what the OHL tries to do (OHL includes 
a mutual patent immunity provision that provides a legal underpinning 
for the rest of the agreement).

John
----


Magnus Danielson wrote:
> From: John Ackermann N8UR <jra at febo.com>
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] TAPR Open HArdware License -- Public Comment Period
> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:11:58 -0500
> Message-ID: <45D09FDE.4000509 at febo.com>
> 
>> Thanks for that pointer, Dave; I ran across that link early on. 
>> Unfortunately, that project appears never to have gone anywhere.  Note 
>> that the page was last updated in 2000!
>>
>> I also looked at the Freedom CPU license referenced there.  It appears 
>> to have been dead since 2000 as well.  It appears to focus mainly on 
>> semiconductor design, which raises a bunch of different issues (much 
>> more like software and copyright) than traditional hardware.  And, 
>> unfortunately, the published draft is more discussion points than actual 
>> license wording.  (There may very well be a good reason to develop a 
>> license for VHDL and similar hardware description works since they don't 
>> totally fit into the software license model, but that's not what the OHL 
>> tried to do.)
> 
> Some projects have chosen to use the BSD license (or actually, BSD V2 license,
> without the advertisement clause) since neither GPL or LGPL matches firmware
> very well. I think BSD like in general is a good startingground when
> attempting non-software license issues (we have enought licensees on software
> to help confusing the hell out of things).
> 
> One might have a look at the artistic license too.
> 
> I'll have a more detailed look. I'm not claiming to be a walk'n-n-talk'n expert
> on various forms of licenses.
> 
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> 
> 




More information about the time-nuts mailing list