Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16
196  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 22, 2007, 05:18:03 pm
And if you can't enforce your trademark, you don't have one, so why not just let it be free smiley

Linus thinks its a good idea or he would have released the trademark. Its his trademark so he can do what he wants.
Just like Arduino team owns the copyrights to all the code and PCB layouts which they have licensed under CC.
Whether not they will use a lawyer to enforce those legal rights is, well, none of our business.

Anyways, Arduino team also doesn't have the fiscal capability to take someone to court if they break the CC license, either. Does that mean they should just release it all into the public domain and "get rid" of that responsibility?

197  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 22, 2007, 04:31:30 pm
Well, Linux *is* trademarked
"You need to apply for a sublicense if you are using the term “Linux” as part of your own trademark or brand identifier for Linux-based software goods or services. It doesn't matter if your trademark is unregistered, or if you do not plan to make any money using the mark."

and at
"Ubuntu is a community developed, *linux-based* operating system" (emph mine)
Ubuntu doesn't call itself "Ubuntu Linux" and their registered trademark is for "Ubuntu" only.

If you read the faq linuxmark are pretty chill with the usage, as long as you aren't putting it on software.

I think the Arduino team is pretty chill, they'll probably sublicense the name to anybody who asks nicely smiley

198  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 22, 2007, 03:56:38 pm
you know,

I'm starting to think that the files and the Arduino name should  BOTH be open to anyone who wants to use them smiley

Well, I think it's probably better that they hold on to the name. It's a unique brand and also keeps confusion down. Someone could, otherwise, buy a thing with the word Arduino on it and be confused as to why its not working the way they expect or is incompatible with the software and then blame Arduino when really its that the clone is not compatible.

Just like generic drugs are the same as brand name, they can say "compare ingredients with Advil!" but they cant say "Advil"
199  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 22, 2007, 03:35:55 pm
Sorry, I wasn't clear.

That's actually part of the Creative Commons licenses and not something I necessarily think needs to or should be there, but that's what the license says, and that same clause is (I believe) in the licenses you're using for your works as well.

??? jeez that's kinda retarded. well if its in the Default License then there's not reason to take it out. Sorry for the rant, I take it back! I thought this was an addition to the as-yet-unpublished Arduino License.

I read CC many years ago but didn't remember it. Mea culpa smiley


ps. I still think its still a silly clause smiley
200  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 22, 2007, 03:31:44 pm
It basically means you can explicitly request that someone not credit you in a derivative work, even though the license ordinarily requires it.  I'm not really sure why you'd use it either - maybe if someone created a derivative of your work that you hated so much that you didn't want anyone knowing it was based on something you did.

Warning: I'm going to rant a little bit here

Is this something that the Arduino project really needs? I mean can you really force someone to not give attribution? And does this retro-actively modify the share-alike clause of CC? That is, if someone makes a derivative of evil-arduino do they have not give credit? or do they have to credit both or what?

If you ask me (which you didnt smiley ) this license-hacking seems like its unnecessary and, well, somewhat creepy. I mean, who cares if someone makes a shitty derivative?  

Why do I feel strongly this? Well because I've seen what can happen when people try to destroy derivatives: Historically, some people on the NetBSD team hate(d) OpenBSD and the OpenBSD project leader  and they would have loved to say "you can't call your project a BSD because we dont like your project, or you!" But (luckily) they couldn't.
Nobody really confuses the two projects, and some people still don't like OpenBSD but you can't really deny that is a BSD derivative, and a very good one that is quite popular with some. The flame war bogged down both groups and was a waste of f'ing time.

(I'm somewhat simplifying the long and tedious netbsd/openbsd flame war here but i think that's probably for the best smiley-wink )

I urge you to reconsider this clause, I see no positive outcomes and only bad ones. However, I will relent if you have a really good example of when this is essential to the survival of the Arduino project.

201  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 22, 2007, 03:10:25 pm
Plus, the license we're using also contains the following clause, just in case we needed it (though I don't think we do):

"If You create a Collective Work, upon notice from any Licensor You must, to the extent practicable, remove from the Collective Work any credit as required by clause 4(c), as requested. If You create a Derivative Work, upon notice from any Licensor You must, to the extent practicable, remove from the Derivative Work any credit as required by clause 4(c), as requested."

i dont understand what this means, or perhaps i do in which case i dont really understand what sort of situation this would used in.

can you give an example?
202  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Open source Project / Hardware on: August 21, 2007, 12:11:44 am
For instance, I have no problem whatsoever with the fact that third party vendors ("Modern Device Company", "Lady Ada") don't publish full CAD files, but they ARE listed and described as third parties.

Hi, can you please clarify what you mean by "don't publish full CAD files"?
I don't think there's a single project right now I have not released full CAD files under OS license, but if this is true I will correct it. Thanks! smiley


ps. also im not sure where i'm listed and described as a third-party vendor. I am a distributor but that's different, no?
203  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Arduino Ethernet! When? on: April 01, 2008, 01:41:08 pm
The "magic" functionality I think we want here is a web page that can display status info the arduino reads from the real world, as well as controlling devices.  As simple as the temperature sensor we've seen, to monitoring which doors are open or closed to a web interface to control every light in the house.

Yes, exactly.

For stuff like that, it looks like the SimpleLAN might be a better choice.  Its web page storage is minimal -- only 31k -- but in this thread, a user demonstrates that the SimpleLAN can interpret standard Javascript , making interactive web page construction simple and straightforward.  You can do a lot with 31k of Javascript.

OK well at least now its clear what you want. FYI, the SimpleLAN doesnt interpret Javascript (like Java applets, they are run on the web client), it does a find-and-replace type thing
204  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Arduino Ethernet! When? on: March 31, 2008, 12:22:54 pm
if you mean
"I gather I can load web pages.  Can I export a Processing app to a web page, then load that page into the sever to get something intelligent running?"

this is not an xport question, this is a java/processing question. in theory, any java app will run. however processing is (from what i have heard) rather bulky and may not fit into the xport space provided, without some effort.

"And would such an app be able to talk to the Xport's serial port (and thus, to the Arduino?)  Or is there an easier way of providing some automation?"

this is answered here:
which has step-by-step examples on how to use java to talk to the serial port

what im confused by is
"I decided that if the Xport folks don't care enough to document their chip, I don't care enough to waste any of my time or money on that flaky outfit's products.  Life is too short."

are you saying you are looking for a step-by-step on how to install processing on an xport to communicate with an arduino? what documentation, specifically, are you missing?
205  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: Arduino Ethernet! When? on: March 30, 2008, 06:54:25 pm
i think you need to be more specific what you mean by "the webserver to do something over the serial interface"
the xport (not xport direct) can run its own webserver and 'talk' to the arduino thru the serial connection via java
which is in the XPort product technical library

or you can 'fake' a website by simply parsing the GET command over serial and spitting out whatever data

do you mean something else?
206  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: avr tutorial on: February 02, 2008, 11:41:10 pm
i took a break to make some cool shields, but will return to the tutorials soon. they take a surpringly long time to write (like 3 days each) and i got a little burnt out after writing 4 in 2 weeks smiley
207  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: avr tutorial on: November 02, 2007, 05:35:45 pm
Alternatively you could rig up a syntax highlighting library to all of the above to do it automatically.
There are a number of good ones around.

Its better for lazy people. smiley

if you mean something like deoxygen, i found it too clunky
208  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: avr tutorial on: November 02, 2007, 09:33:58 am
Looking awesome, as usual.  I added a link to it from the Arduino Guide.  BTW, how are you getting the syntax highlighting in the code samples you post?  (I'm remembering the discussion of the Copy for Discourse function.)

i select each little piece of text in dreamweaver and then use a CSS template to set the color

<div class="codefragment">
        <pre class="codefragment"><span class="call">pinMode</span>(switchPin, <span class="const">INPUT</span>);    <span class="comment">// sets the digital pin as input to read switch</span>

its a real pain in the....which is why i posted to the developer list asking if this could ever be auto-gen'd from Arduino software smiley
209  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: avr tutorial on: November 02, 2007, 09:32:03 am
"The digitalRead() procedure returns a result when its done. That result is either 0 (LOW) or 1 (HIGH) depending on what it saw when it looked at the pin's voltage. In this case, we read the pin and then pass the result as an input to another procedure, digitalRead(). Sure we could use a variable to hold the result and then use that variable as input to digitalRead() but this is much more succinct."

210  Forum 2005-2010 (read only) / News / Re: avr tutorial on: November 01, 2007, 10:33:19 pm
lesson 5 be up
this one was tricky to write, and may be too difficult or too easy
i cant tell
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16