Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 6th Feb 2007 16:12 UTC, submitted by anonymous
GNU, GPL, Open Source A ham radio club in Tucson, Arizona, is inviting public comment on a draft license governing open hardware designs. The Tucson Amateur Packet Radio club's Open Hardware License version 0.9 is available online for comment and discussion through March 7. TAPR says its OHL was designed to help hardware designers engage in collaborative development, "just as open source programmers do today."
Order by: Score:
clause 3
by Cloudy on Tue 6th Feb 2007 18:42 UTC
Cloudy
Member since:
2006-02-15

is unenforcable

you'd think an ip lawyer would know that.

I would strongly recommend that anyone who is interested in this license consult their own IP lawyer, even before commenting on the current draft.

Reply Score: 1

RE: clause 3
by hhcv on Wed 7th Feb 2007 08:59 UTC in reply to "clause 3"
hhcv Member since:
2005-11-12

are you an IP lawyer?

I would strongly recommend that anyone who is interested in this comment consult their own IP lawyer, even before commenting on the current draft.

Also, tell me, what harm is there in making comments about a draft license put out by a hobby-ist club? The FSF, for example, invites public input... Why should that not be the case here?

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: clause 3
by Cloudy on Wed 7th Feb 2007 20:49 UTC in reply to "RE: clause 3"
Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

are you an IP lawyer?

No. I'm reporting what an IP lawyer told me.

Also, tell me, what harm is there in making comments about a draft license put out by a hobby-ist club? The FSF, for example, invites public input... Why should that not be the case here?

There's no harm in commenting. There's no value in uninformed comments. The recommendation was to become informed before commenting.

Why do you have a problem with suggesting that comments be informed?

Reply Score: 2