My original position stands. If you are hung up on the legalistic software application of open source as it applies to software, you have failed. How about spending time writing a theory of operation on your design? That will make it more open and free than the GPL or gear logo ever will.
+1
And this is why the old magazine articles are often far superior "open hardware" projects than modern ones who think all they need to do if whack the design files up on github and slap the gear logo on, and job done.
That's ok or course, you are still sharing your design and making it open, great, well done, but it's a far cry from a nicely written article and theory of operation with block diagrams, timing diagrams, wiring diagrams and other niceties. To poo-poo someone's magazine design and say it's not "open hardware" is just ludicrous. Modern open hardware designs should live up to the standards done back then.
And there are those that argue that magazine projects were not open hardware because they didn't have any modern licencing associated with them, and therefore you shouldn't touch it and it was hence worthless as an open hardware project.
What a load of bollocks. Sorry, but the world worked fine with people building companies around and resusing these magazine article projects since Wireless Weekly in the 1920's.
It was like getting research published in a peer reviewed journal. You got the project published so that:
a) You could make a name for yourself
b) People could critique it and give you feedback.
c) Share designs and idea with other people and advance the industry
d) Encourage people to recreate or expand and build upon your ideas
It was an honor to get your project published and see people build upon it.