Author Topic: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1  (Read 16566 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline alexanderbrevig

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 590
  • Country: no
  • Musician, programmer and EE hobbyist
    • alexanderbrevig.com
OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« on: September 22, 2015, 04:20:27 pm »
Here it is!
http://www.oshwa.org/2015/09/19/open-source-hardware-certification-version-1/

What do you guys think?
There's also the Open Source Hardware Definition if you want to take a look at what they think OSH implies.

"I'll just leave this here"

Offline marshallh

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1462
  • Country: us
    • retroactive
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2015, 04:41:45 pm »
Well, this explains everything.

http://www.oshwa.org/about/our-team/


These people don't seem to understand the concept of "unintended consequences". They have bright futures as career politicians and bureaucrats.
Verilog tips
BGA soldering intro

11:37 <@ktemkin> c4757p: marshall has transcended communications media
11:37 <@ktemkin> He speaks protocols directly.
 

Offline donotdespisethesnake

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Country: gb
  • Embedded stuff
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2015, 11:25:27 am »
Not a bad start, but probably way too late. Everyone uses the OSHWA logo regardless of whether their project is Open Source or not.

Unfortunately the concept of OSH has never really taken off, and most time products described as "Open Source Hardware" don't meet even the basic definition.

For example, Arduino do not publish design files for Arduino Zero. The first line of the OSHW definition says "1. Documentation
The hardware must be released with documentation including design files, and must allow modification and distribution of the design files". Yet Arduino claim the Zero is "fully Open Source". That claim is bullshit!

You can also look at the list of people who endorse OSHW and see how many don't follow the OSHW definition, while still claiming to be "Open Source." Names like Makerbot, OpenROV.

David Mellis who is involved with Arduino, is on the board of OSHWA. If even their own board members can't commit to their own OSH definition, what hope for anyone else?

I think the fact is that without a strong mover like Richard Stallman and FSF, the principles and practice get so diluted by commercial interest that the term Open Source Hardware becomes meaningless, and is just a marketing buzzphrase like "environmentally friendly".

Although Stallman didn't previously care about OSHW, he is now realising that to keep software open will require open hardware, as vendors lock in DRM into hardware, and  breaking DRM is a criminal offence.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2015, 11:27:31 am by donotdespisethesnake »
Bob
"All you said is just a bunch of opinions."
 

Offline XFDDesign

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 435
  • Country: us
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2015, 12:17:40 am »
I'm working on some projects which I intend on opening up to what I believe to be "open source hardware."

This particular lot appear to be more Social Justice Warriors than, say, Electrical or Mechanical engineers in the strict sense. This leaves me somewhat in doubt about their grasp of the subject. As such, what do you folks actually consider to be mandatory items for a piece of hardware to be properly "Open source"?

One concern I have, via Dave's KiCad (I think) video, is that if you don't dev hardware in these tools, it can never be OSHW. This puts a kink in my desires right out of the box, as I use Eagle (regardless of what you think of that particular tool).

 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30869
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2015, 12:37:10 am »
Well, this explains everything.
http://www.oshwa.org/about/our-team/

I find it very intriguing that none of them are electronics engineers as such, mostly the art/design/mech type people. Nothing wrong with that of course, it's just interesting to note.
Is it that us EE's are just too blasé about forming and being involved in such things?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2015, 12:47:18 am by EEVblog »
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30869
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2015, 12:46:53 am »
The problem with the OSHW definition is that is leaves no room for companies to protect their product in arguably reasonable ways, thus probably forcing a lot of bigger companies to get scared and not open their designs up at all.
For example, if a multimeter manufacturer wanted to produce an otherwise "open hardware" multimeter, but didn't want to release say the original CAD files for the case and mouldings (which would be useless to anyone except a direct cloner), how do they do it? They can't call it "OSHW" and use the logo for a product where they have otherwise made completely open in terms of schematics, firmware, protocols etc.
This is the position Makerbot found themselves in.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30869
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2015, 12:50:06 am »
Quote
Enforcement will consist of:
Bringing the alleged failure to comply to the attention of the responsible party and giving the responsible party an opportunity to respond and/or correct
A second attempt to contact the responsible party to structure a path towards compliance
Public listing of the non-compliant project or product on the OSHWA website
Monthly fines not to exceed $500 per month
Monthly fines not to exceed $1,000 per month
Monthly fines not to exceed $10,000 per month

I'd love to see them try and enforce those fines  ;D
But I guess you have to have something token in there.
 

Offline Maxlor

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 564
  • Country: ch
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2015, 01:53:48 am »
It's worth remembering that where the whole "open source" idea comes from, and what's at its core: it comes from the software world, and the goal is for people to be in control of the system they use. (Well, that's the RMS interpretation of it anyway.) It is not part of even RMS' interpretation that everything has to be free for anyone. It's not unheard of for example to provide source code, but to also ask money for windows binaries for example.

If I were to translate this thought to the hardware world, I would ask for:
  • a schematic in order to understand the device I bought, and to be able to change it as I see fit.
  • some way to correlate the schematic to the physical hardware.
  • if software is involved in some way, the source code, and a way to modify the source and apply it to the device.

I don't think that includes layout files, or things like moulds.

Coming from the software world, the intention behind open source is quite clear for me. It's to enable understanding and modification, not cloning and freeloading. While those latter effects might be inherent with software, they're not with hardware, and I don't see why they should be.
 

Offline DrGeoff

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 709
  • Country: au
    • AXT Systems
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2015, 02:50:58 am »
Quote
Enforcement will consist of:
Bringing the alleged failure to comply to the attention of the responsible party and giving the responsible party an opportunity to respond and/or correct
A second attempt to contact the responsible party to structure a path towards compliance
Public listing of the non-compliant project or product on the OSHWA website
Monthly fines not to exceed $500 per month
Monthly fines not to exceed $1,000 per month
Monthly fines not to exceed $10,000 per month

I'd love to see them try and enforce those fines  ;D
But I guess you have to have something token in there.

Sounds like a bunch of idiot bureaucrats getting involved. A designer takes the time and effort to open their designs to the public for free and suddenly they want you to be compliant to some arbitrary spec and fine you if you are not?
Count me out. I make designs, circuits, pcb's available on my site and that's it. People download them, use them, get gerber files to make the design directly, or use the pdf of the schematic to recreate it in the CAD software of their choice and change it however they wish. Since I use proprietary CAD software then there is no point making the designs available that way. However I'm not going to switch to something else just to keep a bunch of bureacrats happy.

Software is just text source files, usuually intended for a particular compiler. Others can port it to whatever compiler/toolset they want. Same with hardware designs. They can be ported to whatever tool the end user wants.

Was it really supposed to do that?
 

Offline con-f-use

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 802
  • Country: at
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #9 on: September 26, 2015, 09:03:59 am »
For example, if a multimeter manufacturer wanted to produce an otherwise "open hardware" multimeter, but didn't want to release say the original CAD files for the case and mouldings (which would be useless to anyone except a direct cloner), how do they do it? They can't call it "OSHW" and use the logo for a product where they have otherwise made completely open in terms of schematics, firmware, protocols etc
Can't they just call the board open source hardware and say something like "OSHW inside"?

These people don't seem to understand the concept of "unintended consequences". They have bright futures as career politicians and bureaucrats.
I don't get your meaning, but I've met Addie in Innsbruck. She's part of the lasersaur project, and an overall nice person.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30869
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #10 on: September 26, 2015, 09:12:18 am »
For example, if a multimeter manufacturer wanted to produce an otherwise "open hardware" multimeter, but didn't want to release say the original CAD files for the case and mouldings (which would be useless to anyone except a direct cloner), how do they do it? They can't call it "OSHW" and use the logo for a product where they have otherwise made completely open in terms of schematics, firmware, protocols etc
Can't they just call the board open source hardware and say something like "OSHW inside"?

Not really, because the OSHW Association have kind of hijacked the term. And you certainly can't/shouldn't use the logo without meeting the "definition" as laid down by them. Of course none of it is legally enforceable, it's a community vibe thing.
If I had a project that didn't meet the terms, I wouldn't put the logo on it, and I'd just use the simple term "Open Hardware" or something like that.
Of course, in practice tons of people use the logo without giving two hoots about if they actually meet the definition or not.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30869
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #11 on: September 26, 2015, 09:18:37 am »
Quote
This will be a new certification logo so it will have no impact on existing products with the open gear.

So there will be a new certification logo. They aren't looking to enforce (nor could they) the current "open gear" logo.
I suspect few will bother to sign up, and will just continue to use the old gear logo the way they always have.
 

Offline donotdespisethesnake

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Country: gb
  • Embedded stuff
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #12 on: September 26, 2015, 09:29:45 pm »
It's clear that no one here really understands what Open Source means, deeply ironic since the forum is entitled "Open Source Hardware" :)

To answer the question why EE's don't care about Open Source. IME most EE's are quite mercenary, and rarely like to give away anything "for free". If there is even a remote possibility of a profit to be made, they want a cut. The idea that someone else could make money off their work ("freeload") generates a brain seizure.

It always puzzles me why anyone would want to call something Open Source, without actually being Open Source. It's like publishing a "Vegetarian Cookbook", where all the recipes require meat.

Strangely, software guys have less of a problem with being altruistic. It is also noticeable that software guys tend to be more left/liberal whereas hardware guys tend to be right/conservative. Lefties being more community-minded and righties driven by the profit motive.

I published a genuinely Open Source Hardware design, and some Chinese company is making and selling it. I don't see a cent of that, and I don't mind, in fact it is what I wanted to happen. That is what Open Source means.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2015, 09:31:24 pm by donotdespisethesnake »
Bob
"All you said is just a bunch of opinions."
 

Offline donotdespisethesnake

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Country: gb
  • Embedded stuff
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #13 on: September 26, 2015, 09:35:40 pm »
For example, if a multimeter manufacturer wanted to produce an otherwise "open hardware" multimeter, but didn't want to release say the original CAD files for the case and mouldings (which would be useless to anyone except a direct cloner),

You may not have heard of these new things called "3D Printers". Apparently they can take CAD files and create plastic objects, cheaply and right in your own home!

Even if not, you may have heard of "milling machines", or even a "saw" which can be used to create enclosures from a variety of materials, given an accurate drawing, possibly derived from a CAD file.

I guess what the manufacturer is looking for is the "Not Really Open License But We Want To Say It Is To Look Trendy" license.
Bob
"All you said is just a bunch of opinions."
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30869
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2015, 01:00:33 pm »
You may not have heard of these new things called "3D Printers". Apparently they can take CAD files and create plastic objects, cheaply and right in your own home!

How may people are going to want to 3D print their own multimeter enclosure?

Quote
I guess what the manufacturer is looking for is the "Not Really Open License But We Want To Say It Is To Look Trendy" license.

And what's wrong with wanting to release some stuff and not others? Does it have to be "all or nothing"? Why?
 

Offline marshallh

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1462
  • Country: us
    • retroactive
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2015, 02:56:06 am »
Verilog tips
BGA soldering intro

11:37 <@ktemkin> c4757p: marshall has transcended communications media
11:37 <@ktemkin> He speaks protocols directly.
 
The following users thanked this post: kony, @rt

Offline GK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2607
  • Country: au
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2015, 12:10:51 pm »
It's clear that no one here really understands what Open Source means, deeply ironic since the forum is entitled "Open Source Hardware" :)


I know exactly what it means. It means the death of capitalism. True, I read so on their website:


In my opinion, OSH is a revolution – economical and cultural. The open source movement creates a lot of value for society and destroys value for classical economic entities (corporations who operate on a closed model relying on intellectual property). This errodes the capitalist model and some people are very worried about it. They perceive open source (OS) as a menace. I am predicting an IP war between OS communities and classical economic entities, similar to the one we’ve seen in the realm of culture (the copyright war).


Pity I can't find a bong-smoking emoticon.


Quote
You may not have heard of these new things called "3D Printers". Apparently they can take CAD files and create plastic objects, cheaply and right in your own home!


Yes, it awesome. Now all these arty-farty "makers" who previously could find nothing better to do with their Ardwinos (or whatever they're called) than make useless half-finished LED blinkies can now devote their creative energies to making their very own butt-plugs and dildos in the comfort and freedom of their own home:

http://3dprintingindustry.com/2015/01/14/safely-enjoy-3d-printed-sex-toy/





« Last Edit: October 03, 2015, 12:13:22 pm by GK »
Bzzzzt. No longer care, over this forum shit.........ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 

Offline XFDDesign

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 435
  • Country: us
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #17 on: October 07, 2015, 03:10:12 pm »
I like you. Let's be eFriends. (Pity I can't yet send you a beer over the internet.)
 

Offline Bassman59

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1302
  • Country: us
  • Yes, I do this for a living
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #18 on: October 08, 2015, 11:23:15 pm »
To answer the question why EE's don't care about Open Source. IME most EE's are quite mercenary, and rarely like to give away anything "for free". If there is even a remote possibility of a profit to be made, they want a cut. The idea that someone else could make money off their work ("freeload") generates a brain seizure.

I think it's a lot simpler, and a lot less mercenary than you describe.
Perhaps it's because the physical cost of software is essentially zero, open-source software doesn't cost the developers anything other than their time. (Yes, time is money, blah blah, and Internet service isn't free, either, but you get my drift.)

 But making hardware is most assuredly not free. Getting PCBs made is not free (or even cheap). Parts aren't free. Enclosures and metalwork are seriously not free. So even the most altruistic open-source devotee might want to see those costs covered. Selling the design as a product seems to be the most straightforward way to do that.


Quote
Strangely, software guys have less of a problem with being altruistic. It is also noticeable that software guys tend to be more left/liberal whereas hardware guys tend to be right/conservative. Lefties being more community-minded and righties driven by the profit motive.

I suppose I'm the oddball EE who is a liberal, but seriously I don't think you can define things in such a clear-cut manner. That said, I like to be paid for my work, because the mortgage lender wants dollars, not schematics, and the kid needs to eat.
 

Offline timofonic

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 904
  • Country: es
  • Eternal Wannabe Geek
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #19 on: November 04, 2015, 04:04:37 pm »
My conclusion to this group:
- Certainly OSHWA has shady practices. I would call them "Poser Light Blinkers Hipsters Shady Association" (PLBHSA) or "Poser Electronics Hobbyists Wanting Money Association" (PEHWMA). This is just another moneylaundring NGO, being involved in stuff with cool names. Other than that, this is just a way of self-promotion to become more interesting and maybe become more popular.
- They are tainting the "Open Hardware" term with even more shit.
- The penalties policy sounds as a extortionist way to get money, not to promote "Open Hardware". It certainly can have a negative and destructive effect in the community.
- Are there anyone really relevant in that group?
* Arduino was killed by money greed and ego:
**They just are  relevant because of past projects.
** It's just a trend, because there are cheap development kits that are manufactured by chinese too.
** Similar projects will appear, maybe even directly promoted by Atmel and other microcontroller manufacturers if they are smart enough: The days of expensive devkits are going to stop, students will use the tools they feel more comfortable with and this is a way to make them stick to your platform than others.
* Most sites in the list of signers are unavailable, mostly irrelevant, broken, outdated or closed: I checked it.



I'll provide an informal and personal proposal about the Electronics FOSS in a new post. I'll put a link here.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 04:20:06 pm by Circuiteromalaguito »
 

Offline f5r5e5d

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 349
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2015, 05:18:45 am »
basically hardware is born free - absent active patents - you have to take specific action to gain limited time protection

hardware is different - and engineers know it - you either have a limited time patent, practice a trade secret with contractual terms or you've already given away anything about physical hardware disclosed in publication, or discoverable by any degree of inspection, "reverse engineering" any sold product absent binding contracts protecting secrecy

physical hardware, "inventions", "useful works" are not within the scope of copyright - you can't apply the principles to hardware

design documentation however can be copyright protected - you can use "open source" copyright ideas to control (including "freeing") some classes of exact copies of some design documents - but not the ideas, design principles, however "inventive" - you have to get a patent to have any legal basis for controlling hardware


read the link in this post from the other thread:
metri,
If your project includes a novel or patentable technology or concept, then be sure to choose a license such as TAPR OHL ( https://www.tapr.org/ohl.html ) in order to protect the novel concept from getting patented by a third party.  Usually any public disclosure of something original is enough to prevent a patent by third party. However, there are hypothetical cases where a license that addresses patent issues helps to protect a open source hardware project.
cheers,
Ben

« Last Edit: November 11, 2015, 04:35:43 pm by f5r5e5d »
 

Offline GK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2607
  • Country: au
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2015, 09:20:27 am »
- The penalties policy sounds as a extortionist way to get money, not to promote "Open Hardware". It certainly can have a negative and destructive effect in the community.


Dude, nobody is going to voluntarily pay fines to an organization with pretend lawful authority. I don't know to what extent trademark law would even apply here; IP (such as a logo) is typically trademarked by an individual, company or organization for that individual, company or organizations exclusive use. And in any case, even if you legitimately have IP protected under trademark law, that only gives you the power to take legal action against infringing parties, not the jurisdiction over the courts to enforce the law yourself or devise of or dictate the actual penalties. If this "association" aggressively attempted to collect their stated fines from a perceived infringer/abuser of their logo it would be my guess that they'd be treading a very fine line between simply existing in their own little fantasy world and actually violating real world criminal codes, particularly relating to fraud and extortion.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2015, 12:41:35 pm by GK »
Bzzzzt. No longer care, over this forum shit.........ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 

Offline timofonic

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 904
  • Country: es
  • Eternal Wannabe Geek
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #22 on: November 12, 2015, 07:49:10 pm »
- The penalties policy sounds as a extortionist way to get money, not to promote "Open Hardware". It certainly can have a negative and destructive effect in the community.


Dude, nobody is going to voluntarily pay fines to an organization with pretend lawful authority. I don't know to what extent trademark law would even apply here; IP (such as a logo) is typically trademarked by an individual, company or organization for that individual, company or organizations exclusive use. And in any case, even if you legitimately have IP protected under trademark law, that only gives you the power to take legal action against infringing parties, not the jurisdiction over the courts to enforce the law yourself or devise of or dictate the actual penalties. If this "association" aggressively attempted to collect their stated fines from a perceived infringer/abuser of their logo it would be my guess that they'd be treading a very fine line between simply existing in their own little fantasy world and actually violating real world criminal codes, particularly relating to fraud and extortion.

I agree with you, but I think they might do their own bubble until it explodes ;)
 

Offline AlxDroidDev

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 471
  • Country: br
    • Arduino Web Brasil
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2016, 04:09:59 am »
It would be quite ironic if OSHWA trademarks the logo. Since trademark is a sort of IP protection, they'll be doing the exact same practice they're trying to fight.

IMHO, they are helpless.

Enforcing OSH rules should be left to the general community, not to a shady organization. It works that way with OSS, why wouldn't it work with OSH?
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 10:48:36 am by AlxDroidDev »
"The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from." (Andrew S. Tanenbaum)
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: OSHWA: Open Source Hardware Certification Version 1
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2016, 05:33:32 am »
It's almost cute when people with zero standing try to play "official"... They're so up themselves that they think people care about their clubhouse rules.

Their rules for Open Source Hardware are silly, so I just make Open Hardware or Public Domain Hardware instead (when I actually have time to make hardware anymore...) and spare myself having to be associated with them ^-^
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf