Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 315 subscribers
  • Views 316 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

"The Unspoken Rules of Open Source Hardware"

fustini

Phil Torrone posted an interesting essay recently on the Make blog which explores the social customs of the Open Source Hardware community:

image

http://blog.makezine.com/2012/02/14/soapbox-the-unspoken-rules-of-open-source-hardware/

I spend most of my days working on open source hardware in some way, and I wanted to talk about some of the {unspoken} rules we all, well, many, seem to follow. Why? Because the core group of people who’ve been doing what we’ve collectively called “open source hardware” know each other — we’re friends, we overlap and compete in some ways, but we all work towards a common goal: sharing our work to make the world a better place and to stand on each others shoulders and not each others toes : )

 

Dangerous Prototypes followed up with their comments to several of Phil's points:

 

http://dangerousprototypes.com/2012/02/15/a-culture-of-ethics-in-open-source-hardware/

We try to extend this beyond royalties for a hardware design. Dangerous Prototypes is supported by an amazing community, and we try to share royalties directly with community members who make major contributions. We’re not a funding power house, but we try to be generous with free hardware, PCBs, and sometimes even cash, when someone makes a major contribution.

 

I'm curious to know for anyone here that is involved with Open Source Hardware: what do you think of the rules that were mentioned?  Are some off base?  Are important rules missing?

 

 

Cheers,

Drew

Parents

  • Hi Drew,

     

    I know some of you think that I am against Open Source products, but you would be wrong.  I fully support unique hardware and software built and provided by dedicated engineers who feel they should share their ideas. 

    Back in the late 1970's most engineers worked under the basic principles expressed above.  Mostly through necessity.  Nearly everything related to computers, hardware and software interfacing, etc was all new.  Anyone with a neat idea often saved hundreds of others many long nights trying to solve the same problem.  We created and shared freely.

     

    Then came the lawyers and the big manufacturers who forced us to sign over our creative rights to qualify for employment.  Soon after that event, sharing ended.  Companies became so fearful at what they could lose that they forgot what they had to gain by keeping the information flow open.  It was a very sad situation to have to watch.

     

    I for one, fully endorse the Open Source and the Open Rules definitions above.  If you use anything from someone else, try to repay the community with something you create.  That said, I am still against reengineering and stealing intellectual property.  I expect everyone to adhere to the law. 

     

    That does not mean that you cannot use intellectual property for yourself.  The law is mostly to stop someone from "cloning" your hardware and/or software and underselling the original developer.  As one person commented on the rules, its just not worth your effort to try to police the world.  All you can do is try to be fair to everyone and resist the tempation to steal and disseminate the stolen information of others.

     

    Besides, if you are a really good engineer, you can understand the basic requirements of anyone's design and find new ways to do the same thing or better yet, something much better than the original design.  You don't have to steal, you just need to out-innovate.  A subtle difference I agree, but that is the fine line of the law.

     

    With the technology changing as fast as it does these days, I see few examples where copying a device is really worth the effort.  You need to leap frog your designs and be first to market these days.

     

    So you will see me provide hardware and software to this community in the future and I will be on the lookout to see if someone has developed capabilities I can use.  I think the Element 14 members are mature enough to share and share alike so that we can all have fun. 

     

    Just my opinion.

     

    DAB

  • in reply to DAB

    Hi DAB,

     

    That will be great if you are able to contribute designs and software.  Based on the quality of your posts, I'm sure they will be useful to the community.

     

    Interesting to hear about the culture in the 70s.  It's too bad it changed like that.  The history of Unix is very similar where its commercialization in the 80s by AT&T resulted in unproductive fracturing of the community.  It wasn't until many years later that Linux was able to overcome the proprietary flavors and bring openness back to the forefront. (I dig BSD too but unfortunately legal turmoil made it miss the window that Linux took advantage of)

     

    Cheers,

    Drew

Reply
  • in reply to DAB

    Hi DAB,

     

    That will be great if you are able to contribute designs and software.  Based on the quality of your posts, I'm sure they will be useful to the community.

     

    Interesting to hear about the culture in the 70s.  It's too bad it changed like that.  The history of Unix is very similar where its commercialization in the 80s by AT&T resulted in unproductive fracturing of the community.  It wasn't until many years later that Linux was able to overcome the proprietary flavors and bring openness back to the forefront. (I dig BSD too but unfortunately legal turmoil made it miss the window that Linux took advantage of)

     

    Cheers,

    Drew

Children
No Data