Go Down

Topic: "Branding" open source hardware... (Read 2737 times) previous topic - next topic

westfw

I originally posted this over on Lady Ada's Blog, but I guess here is more appropriate....

So suppose that the Arduino team now has a fancy logo, incorporated onto the solder-side silkscreen. Or suppose that Ninja Networks does a DefCon electronic party badge that has artistic graphics in several layers (copper, soldermask, silkscreen? (really cool, BTW.))

Is it legitimately "open source hardware" to distibute CAD files without that "additional, non-functional, artwork", as an anti-piracy technique?

I would think so; and it might even be a useful "standard" of branding (it should be easy enough to do within the design.) It wouldn't prevent any of the good things (derivative designs, etc) that OSHW makes possible, and it wouldn't even stop the determined pirate, or even the low-balling offshore manufacturer. It would just make it a bit harder for the particularly lazy and dishonest pirates to imply authenticity?

pracas

true.... perhaps we'll soon see more design parameters on other boards coming as well....
Be The Change...

UltraMagnus

I hardly call the manufacture of generic open source hardware "piracy".  All the time branded arduinos are manufactured in a place where labour is over priced, the will be generics.

mowcius

Quote
where labour is over priced

I have to say: Would you want to do it?
Yes maybe the labour is more expensive than in china or some other country where they pay the majority of their workers not enough but if you wanted to get a load of people from the UK or the USA or many other countries that most of us live in then labour would not be any cheaper.

I would rather pay a bit extra and know that the person who has made the board is payed a decent wage and the product is going to be a of a top quality than buy something cheap from china which might not be so great on those regards.

Mowcius

Osgeld

I want my boards stained with the tears of the workers and painted with the blood of their fingers for less than 9.99$
;D
http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php?action=unread;boards=2,3,4,5,67,6,7,8,9,10,11,66,12,13,15,14,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,86,87,89,1;ALL

mowcius

Quote
I want my boards stained with the tears of the workers and painted with the blood of their fingers for less than 9.99$

Well we could have an arduino with USB for about $9.99 if we changed to purely a USB capable Atmel chip...

The 328-type ones are pretty cheap.

Mowcius

nick

presumably running the usb code on the chip alongside the sketch complicates things to much.

Having a seperate chip means for people who dont want to deal with that extra level of complexity/customisation can just carry on as before (as can all the code already knocking around). For those who want to dig into those things solutions will emerge. Dean who writes the LUFA code running on the usb chip is already mentioning arduino specific example sin the next release of LUFA

mowcius

Quote
presumably running the usb code on the chip alongside the sketch complicates things to much.

Hmm, maybe.

nick

main site is down - will be back soon

mowcius

Indeed. Spiffy!

On another note.. Anyone know where the stream is meant to be at?


mowcius

Indeed it is.

You on the arduino IRC?

Better to chat in there...

Udo Klein

#12
Sep 26, 2010, 10:03 pm Last Edit: Sep 26, 2010, 10:05 pm by udoklein Reason: 1
@Westf: if it is open source it can be pirated. That is it can be used in other designs violating the license terms. Usually this is done by not making the derived work as open as the license terms require.

Branding it creates another possibility for piracy. Namely: the trademark can be pirated.

Why would anyone brand something that is easy to copy? In order to advertise it. Unless you brand it you can not advertise it. Hence branding helps to market your stuff and thus to collect more money as you otherwise could.

Is branding for open source stuff OK? I think so. If someone decides to open source his stuff, he is publishes all implementation details. Why should he not retain advantage like branding it? Have a look at Richard Stallman's opinion http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html. I share his point on "free speech" vs. "free beer" although I do not share 100% of his views.

Udo
Check out my experiments http://blog.blinkenlight.net

nick

havent been, but am downloading client now and will pop my head in

UltraMagnus

Quote
That is it can be used in other designs violating the license terms.


lawyers?

Go Up