Open source files and code (and license) for Arduino products missing?

on arduino day april 1, 2017 there was the promise to keep arduino open source, it's on the packaging and more and is what is advertised. consumers are purchasing things that are called open-source when it comes to arduino products.

here's a cursory review of some of the boards from arduino.org. there are some missing files/licenses we looked for but could not find.

Arduino Primo: Arduino - Home
"Schematic & Reference Design - Coming soon"

there's also firmware burned onto the STM32FL103

but unclear where the source code for that lives or what license its under

Star Otto: Arduino - Home
Only Schematic posted, no license indicated, DogHunter logo is the only ownership note
Arduino - Home

Arduino STAR - LCD Arduino - Home
No technical files.

Arduino YUN MINI: Arduino - Home
Only schematic posted, no license indicated, DogHunter is author/owner
File Not Found
Schematic black-boxes "WiFi module" despite it being an integral part of the board and designed by Arduino.org, not a submodule

Arduino LUCKY SHIELD: Arduino - Home
Schematics have no license indicated, DogHunter is author/owner
EAGLE files: arduino-Lucky-Shield-reference-design.zip links to a PDF of the gerber print with no Eagle Files, DogHunter/Linino is author/owner

some of these are new products so perhaps it takes some time, however some are from 2014, 2015 or 2016:
http://download.arduino.org/products/LUCKY/SHIELD_LUCKY_V032_20150224_SCH.pdf
http://download.arduino.org/products/YUNMINI/Arduino-yun-mini-schematics.pdf

Braccio

Schematic & Reference Design
EAGLE files: Braccio-Shield-reference-design.zip (coming soon)
Schematic: Braccio-Shield-schematic.pdf (coming soon)
(and it appears there is not indication the mechanics will be released either)

  1. are these products open source?
  2. if so, where are the open source files?
  3. if not, why is it not open source?
  4. PDFs are not considered design files:
    Definition (English) – Open Source Hardware Association
    "The hardware must be released with documentation including design files, and must allow modification and distribution of the design files."
  5. the owner/author of many of these is DogHunter/Linino, not Arduino, why is that?

we emailed the arduino folks (Federico Musto, Fabio Violante, Daniela Antonietti) to get clarification and where these files are located for the open-source hardware and software products from arduino.

thanks,
adafruit (ladyada & pt)

*edit made links click-able as per request 5:11pm 6/14/2017
*edit added another one that was pointed out to us that is missing files/license,etc 5:41am 6/15/2017

(deleted)

we did email the owner(s) of the arduino.cc site.

Company: Arduino AG (Federico Musto)
Domains:
arduino.cc

arduinocamp.com

I think it's reasonable to discuss this issue on the arduino.cc forum (though the choice of forum section is debatable). The two Arduinos are supposedly working together in some form now and arduino.org products are being sold in the arduino.cc store, including the Yun Mini listed above. I think we could expect to see more of those boards sold here in the future. Members of this community will be providing support and writing code for this hardware. This is the primary place where the community discusses things and these issues are very much of concern to the entire community. A post to the arduino.org forum would not have nearly as much reach. It's important to decide what standard we expect of Arduino products sold as "Open Source" and push for that standard to be met.

Here's the Developer's Mailing List thread for the same topic:
https://groups.google.com/a/arduino.cc/forum/#!topic/developers/Oz22cWIIbN4

@adafruit, if you have posted this elsewhere I would request you to post links to those discussions also. Please use the chain links icon on the toolbar to make links clickable.

linked added and what other place would make sense for this on the forums? can a mod move it there?

thanks!

spycatcher2k:
With all due respect - why not ask them?

This is the arduino.cc site.

Adafruit have started a vendetta campaign against Federico Musto, apparently they dislike that Musto falsely claimed to have a PhD from MIT, they are trying to disrupt and harass Arduino AG as much as possible. I don't see it working.

bobcousins:
Adafruit have started a vendetta campaign against Federico Musto, apparently they dislike that Musto falsely claimed to have a PhD from MIT, they are trying to disrupt and harass Arduino AG as much as possible. I don't see it working.

If you want to create a new thread for your conspiracy theory feel free to do so and we can discuss it there. Let's keep this thread focused on the topic of the openness of hardware sold by Arduino as "open source". and what we can do to make it more open.

Do you dispute any of the statements made in this thread by adafruit?

Do you disagree that the community would benefit from these design files and firmware sources being made publicly available with clear licensing documentation?

Oh, it's no conspiracy, they have made it clear they want to take down Federico Musto. They are spending a lot of effort on it.

Adafruit don't really care about a few missing files, that is just a ruse to get people riled up. Arduino have always had some files missing, so what. Arduino have never been bothered about it. They will release files when they are ready.

It's important to remember that Arduino are under no obligation to publish anything.

As I said, please take discussion of your conspiracy theory to another thread.

If you want to discuss the topic of this thread your input is welcome, maybe you could start by answering my questions:

pert:
Do you dispute any of the statements made in this thread by adafruit?

Do you disagree that the community would benefit from these design files and firmware sources being made publicly available with clear licensing documentation?

bobcousins:
It's important to remember that Arduino are under no obligation to publish anything.

I think there are two considerations here:

  • What is legally required - I don't think anyone plans to take legal action so for the most part this is moot.
  • What should be expected of a member of the open source community in good standing - The Arduino community is what really sets Arduino far ahead of any of the competition. We do have the ability to influence the policy of these companies. Those files are already sitting on a hard drive. It would take at most a couple of hours of work to make them available. A little push from us could be all that is required to make this happen.

Even though I have no immediate need for them, I tend to think that the community would be better off if these resources were available. I also think it's good to maintain a precedent of openness. When the hardware is released the design files and software should also be released. I'm interested to hear any arguments against this. Until someone can convince me otherwise I support the efforts of Adafruit to get some action or at least answers on these issues.

Ok, as long as you don't mind being used like a puppet, I will leave the room and let you two to snuggle up... have fun :wink:

BTW This is what Phil Torrone posted to OSHWA mailing list

=== quoted from MAKE magazine ===
the real reason for an arduino foundation is to free arduino from federico musto and ensure that this open source hardware project is responsive to the community that cares about arduino and its ecosystem.

define its mission to protect and promote the interests of the arduino community;
determine a board of independent directors who are not chosen by arduino holding; are not limited to the existing arduino team; and excludes federico musto.
operate in an open and transparent manner.
have visibility into the business of arduino holdings to hold it accountable as a watchdog.

perhaps it should be called the free arduino foundation. free as in freedom. free to operate on its own. free to represent a commitment to the mutual interests of the arduino community.

we've emailed arduino.org, their PR folks and the CEO regarding this and other things, it seems they will not comment :frowning:

thanks,
pt (and limor)

here is some more...

installed Orcad Capture Lite (which was quite an adventure :slight_smile: we were able to example the DSN files posted for other products. these are in addition to the list of items from before.

Arduino TIAN

The "DSN" file posted is the orcad schematic only - there is no board file information or layout included (it's the same as the PDF)

Arduino INDUSTRIAL 101

The link "EAGLE files: arduino-industrial101-reference-design.zip" does not link to Eagle files.
It is a zip of an ORCAD DSN file which is also just a schematic. There is no board file information or layout included (it's the same as the PDF)
The WiFi/Linux logic is in a blackbox called 'chiwawa' module.
This module has an Arduino logo on the PCB and tin. It appears to be exclusively designed by "dog hunter"
(also the author of the Arduino Industrial 101 schematics)
http://www.doghunter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/chiwawa2.jpg
We could not find any schematics or layout for this module anywhere.

also on on the physical board, doghunter and linino logos.

Arduino YUN

Also no board layout files, only schematic in PDF and Orcad DSN format (it's the same as the PDF)
The file does have a Creative Commons 2.5 BY-SA notice on it

and a few people emailed me directly and pointed out there are a lot more arduino.org products that are missing files and licenses, code, etc. here is another...

Braccio

Schematic & Reference Design
EAGLE files: Braccio-Shield-reference-design.zip (coming soon)
Schematic: Braccio-Shield-schematic.pdf (coming soon)
(and it appears there is no indication the mechanics will be released either)

Looks like this is more of a "RANT"

Maybe time to put it in "bar sport" ?

At one time or another, there are always some files missing. No organisation is perfect. I have found 100's of other companies claiming to be Open Source Hardware, but not providing source files, and in a majority of cases, not even using an Open Source license... the key point is the license.

Arduino are actually probably one of the best companies for open-ness and providing design files. It's a strange target to pick, unless you have a beef with Arduino. At the end of the day, if you don't like any of a company's business practices, then you are free not to do business with them.

Which is why I do not do business with Adafruit. Adafruit should be minding their own business, and not harassing other Open Source companies. Adafruit have made a ton of money out of the general Arduino/maker/Open Source ecosystem, if they want to help out, maybe they could offer some of their resources?

Bar Sport is probably where this belongs.

I've been staying out of this thread. But, I have to wonder if the adafruit user REALLY represents adafruit. The tone of the post makes me think otherwise.

Not that I'm a fan of adafruit and their over-priced shipping. Buying a $12 product and having to pay $8 to get it shipped in a package that they could have sent via USPS for under $1 grates on me.

The identical thread on the Developer's Mailing List was started by Phillip Torrone, from an adafruit.com email address. According to Wikipedia, he is Limor Fried's (owner of Adafruit) spouse:
Limor Fried - Wikipedia
So I think that this user does indeed represent Adafruit.

I don't know what you mean by the "tone of the post". Could you point out an example of what you mean? They have done nothing here except to state facts that are of interest to this community. Sure there is a "tone" in other discussions (Arduino Foundation, Federico Musto's credentials) and there may be room for some disagreement there. However, that's off topic for this thread. If anyone can provide a correction for any of the statements adafruit made above I'm sure they would be welcome.

I just don't understand the negative reactions to this. My mind is open to being convinced that these files should not be made available but nobody here has even made an attempt. What is wrong with pointing out that design files, etc. for Arduino products sold as "Open Source" are not available?

And to the accusations that I'm "snuggling", I have a few gripes about the adafruit.com store (including what PaulS mentioned) and I've complained publicly about these things on this forum and elsewhere. On the other hand, I've had a couple other experiences where their customer service greatly exceeded my expectations. But that's really irrelevant to this thread. If you don't like how they run their business then don't buy from them, it doesn't mean that everything they say is invalid.

What's undeniable is that Adafruit has made significant contributions to the Arduino community. A search of the Adafruit organization GitHub page for "arduino library" results in 77 repositories:
Adafruit Industries · GitHub library
that's only a portion of what they've done. You can argue that this work was done to increase the profitability of their business but we all benefit from it even if we never buy a single Adafruit product.

Does anyone have any sort of EVIDENCE that Musto is behind the lack of documentation ?

Only had one interaction with thier CS and to be blunt...OK maybe not that blunt in public but If I could there would be expletives involved.
Lets just say I came away far less than satisfied and since that point have directed my custom elsewhere.

And of course there is the price points But to be fair that applies to a lot of the larger names that made and still do make a good chunk of cash off the back of Arduino RasPi et all.

Sure its not "misinformation" but it sure as hell is sour grapes and vindictive IMHO

If they want Musto go for "MUSTO" not the whole "Arduino community" which this is essentially trying to stir up to get behind them. (FAIL)
Whoever is behind it (no factual proof given) then if they are part of Ada they really must have a business death wish.
In case they missed the part about in-fighting and ill will splitting companies and costing a lot of money (HINT).

If it is ADA they should spend more time bringing all thier stuff up to date with regards libs, examples etc. many of which still have the older PDE examples LOL instead of just putting it out there and forgetting about it for the most part.
Maybe look at thier pricing structure as a common theme seems to be thier prices.
Maybe a little less time looking for the smallest thing to gripe about.
So what if Arduino doesn't have all thier "T's" crossed or "I's" dotted. there is still enough data sheets and such that if anyone wanted to really build one of the boards they could do it...
Not like the old days when manufacturers would sand off part numbers deliberately.

It is my take that if it is Ada then they are cutting thier nose off to spite thier face.

Why does it matter who's behind the unavailability of these files? I could care less who is responsible, I just want it fixed. I've never taken a side in any of this "Arduino vs Arduino" stuff because I don't feel I had enough of the facts to know if one side was clearly in the wrong. I'll always side with the Arduino community and the Arduino community benefits from these files being available so I support anyone trying to make that happen regardless of their motives. The quality of Adafruit's customer service or the prices of their products is irrelevant to this discussion.

I agree that Adafruit is taking a business risk by pushing for this and that's all the more reason why they should have our support.

Again, nobody has presented a single valid argument against the actual topic of this thread, just a lot of off-topic attacks and whining. Why is everyone so defensive about this? Can we please just put aside this immaturity and have a reasonable on-topic discussion?

Hi Pert you are one person I don't want to ever fight but one of your posts brought up the MUSTO issue. (probably not just you).

It just seems to appear somebody was taking aim at him via the lack of documentation issue.
Personally I dont give a flying (insert expletive) about Musto.

Given that it seems to be part of a wider attack to something different altogether Why on earth would I put my weight behind an organisation that is using these types of tactic for personal gain despite the "possible" benefits to some documentation that doesn't get asked for too frequently.

Sure its one of those "nice to have" things and on rare occasions would be of benefit.
But thats not worth me putting my name on it for a wider issue that has jack #*it to do with me.

pert:
Again, nobody has presented a single valid argument against the actual topic of this thread,

Ok, I will address that directly. I don't really care if there are some missing design files, and I'll bet the vast majority of Arduino users don't care either. If there are no on-topic replies, it's because no one really cares about the issue.

I don't think Arduino (or any IP creator) is under any obligation to make every single one of their products completely open, even if they describe themselves as an "open source" company. If you don't like a company's business practice, don't do business with them, simple as that.

Thanks Bob.

That spurred me onto a slight tangent of the same aspect.

Who is to say some documentation is not withheld by the original part supplier or vendor in some form of agreement ?

That would make it legally difficult for Arduino themselves to supply some aspects of documentation.
Intel and Microsoft are especially known for such tight and very binding agreements.

Sure they could supply a schematic with a large hole in in / redaction...Here is our bit but this big black bit is copyright INTEL CORPORATION (TM) ...Would look a little crazy maybe.

Open source is awesome but some aspects are out of the control of every company.
Even some aspects of Arduino software are not open sourced (CREATE EDITOR) and reasons can be as simple as the fact that in doing so you may open up a slew of security factors an upstart copy cats (clones).
Some items simply HAVE to be withheld despite your best efforts to put as much out there as possible as a company.

Even ADA has secrets I am sure.