Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Down
Author Topic: Open source Project / Hardware  (Read 10887 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Thanks Mellis, I hadn't thought of that.

Maybe the real issue to clarify is how you'll allow the Arduino trademark to be used on physical designs?  

The CC license doesn't cover the boards, only the designs in file/printed page form.

D
Logged

0
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
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?
Logged

Forum Administrator
Cambridge, MA
Offline Offline
Faraday Member
*****
Karma: 9
Posts: 3538
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

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.
Logged

Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Switching to my artist hat, that clause is basically a moral rights clause. In most countries you get it by default, even if you have licensed the reproduction right to someone else. It prevents unsavoury uses of whatever your copyright is.... say someone wants to make an Arduino cruise-missile controller, and you're a pacifist, just as an example.

OOPS. Now we're gonna have the NSA tapping your phone lines, talking to a foreigner about cruise missiles. Sorry  

D
Logged

0
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
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.

  limor
« Last Edit: August 22, 2007, 03:33:30 pm by ladyada » Logged

Forum Administrator
Cambridge, MA
Offline Offline
Faraday Member
*****
Karma: 9
Posts: 3538
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

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.
Logged

0
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
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

  limor

ps. I still think its still a silly clause smiley
« Last Edit: August 22, 2007, 03:41:14 pm by ladyada » Logged

Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

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

Then the team can promote, trademark and enforce a franchise on  Diecimila, BT, NG, etc.

That just seems too darn simple. That way it's entirely equitable to all involved, as everyone has access to the Arduino name and designs to use as they see fit. Some will produce junk, some will produce fine quality things like Diecimila.

I think it's a mistake to think that the team really "owns" the Arduino name anyway... in theory, yes... but

a) it would cost 5 to 10K dollars per instance to prosecute offenders, and
b) the name gained its current value with the contribution of hundred of other people.

We're not talking Linux here smiley

Daniel
« Last Edit: August 22, 2007, 03:55:12 pm by Daniel » Logged

0
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
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"
Logged

Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Sure, but don't you find this less confusing:

 "Arduino" refers to so many things:
- open software
- open hardware designs
- many many tutorials and documents of unknown copyright,
- a community
- a way of learning and doing electronics.  


Whereas the anmes of the boards are crystal-clear:
Diecimila = Arduino team produced board
Barebones = Paul Badger's board
Arduino Runtime= NKC electronics' board
Carduino= your board

People know the difference.

The "confusion" claim, i.e. that people will mix up who makes what product, doesn't pan out.  Trademarking Arduino would be more about protecting the franchise that extends beyond the boards: community, hardware design control, etc.  I'm saying that maybe that should be totally open, name and all. We can still have high-quality Diecimila boards. It's not like anyone is goign to run out and make copies so that they can shave that extra $4 off the profit margin.... it's not worth their while.  

Anyway it has the same ring as Suse Linux, RedHat Linux, etc, so we need to be at least able to freely use the Arduino name under license, that much is clear.
D
Logged

Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
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 to argue that point on a purely objective level smiley , I think it's FUD, as there aren't any non-compatible Arduino products that I know of. Anyone who buys a Barebones Arduino (which uses the name but doesn't match the specs of the original) knows they are getting a slimmed-down version of the original, and that the product has been engineered to be compatible with Arudino software. Buyers  don't turn around and blame anyone... In fact it seems like Paul's use of the Arduino name and his derivative design works just fine in practice! No collapse of the Arduino empire in sight!

By contrast, the VAST majority of complaints/ compatibility questions in the forum are about the team-produced, officially sanctioned Arduino NG, Arduino BT or Diecimila. Yes they have sold a lot more of those, but still, You would be hard pressed ot find complaint threads about the Barebones.

You could actually make a pretty reasonable argument that Paul should be worried about the Arduino problems turning people off of the Barebones! ;D  OK I meant that just in principle.


D
« Last Edit: August 22, 2007, 04:23:51 pm by Daniel » Logged

Forum Administrator
Cambridge, MA
Offline Offline
Faraday Member
*****
Karma: 9
Posts: 3538
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I think we're definitely going to hold on to the name Arduino in the same way as most every other open-source project (e.g. Linux, Debian, Ubuntu, Firefox).  While Arduino has become a great community and has benefited from the contribution of many people, there's still a need to preserve the identity and that needs to be controlled in some way.  Otherwise, people who aren't part of the community, or who don't agree with the goals of the project, or who just want to sell out the community for a quick buck would have the right to use it as well.  Yes, we want to do what's best for the community, but that doesn't mean letting anyone do anything they want.  
Logged

Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
Otherwise, people ... who just want to sell out the community for a quick buck would have the right to use it as well.  


that's FUD too smiley
Logged

0
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Well, Linux *is* trademarked
http://www.linuxmark.org/
"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 http://www.ubuntu.com/
"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


  limor
« Last Edit: August 22, 2007, 04:37:35 pm by ladyada » Logged

Daniel
Guest
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

yes but... the reality is that the Arduino foundation could never afford what it costs to oversee world wide trademark compliance. In addition to that, they would have to immediately start sending "Cease and desist" letters to those who have used the trademark on their products, as trademarks have to be defended consistently in order to be valid. Those cost $500 a pop, and you would just pray that the person desists, because if they don't, it'll cost you thousand more. Any smart infringer's lawyer will just bog things down, so that the trademark enforcer can no longer afford to pay the mounting legal costs of enforcement. This is the sad but true fact of it.  If your trademark lawyer spends four hours on defending your trademark one week, the bill will be in excess of $1000.  If it takes forty hours... well then you're screwed. and if it goes to court, you're really, really screwed.  

Take it form Linus Torvalds himself, who said the following while explaining the licensing fees charged by the Linux Mark Institute:

"Linux founder Linus Torvalds is defending protection of the Linux trademark and insists that sublicensing is a loss-making operation.
Last month, a lawyer acting on behalf of Torvalds, wrote to 90 companies in Australia and asked them to relinquish any legal claim to the name Linux and to purchase a license from the Linux Mark Institute, a nonprofit organization that is the licensee for the Linux trademark.

... Companies will need to pay between $200 and $5,000 to sublicense the Linux trademark, which led some in the open-source community to accuse Torvalds of cashing in on the success of Linux...

"Not only do I not get a cent of the trademark money, but even (the Linux Mark Institute, which actually administers the trademark) has so far historically always lost money on it," Torvalds said in a posting to the Linux Kernel Mailing List. "

If it's not cost-effective for Linux to administer their trademark, it sure isn't going to be for Arduino.    It is a sad fact of international copyright law that trademark and copyright enforcement is for people with money. You do not ofter (ever?) see cases of ordinary people going to court over their trademarks or copyright: it is always a corporation, a publisher or someone with money to burn.
  
Seen in this light the Arduino trademark is unenforceable. I can't imagine that you have 20K sitting around per year for enforcing it. I also can't imagine that you'd want to spend any time doing that! It's counter to what the project is about.  So why not just let it be free smiley

Daniel
« Last Edit: August 22, 2007, 05:14:14 pm by Daniel » Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Up
Jump to: