On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Elena ``of Valhalla'' elena.valhalla@gmail.com wrote:
On 2015-09-09 at 16:04:26 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Alejandro Mery amery@geeks.cl wrote:
Hi Joem, look at olimex boards at https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/A20/open-source-hardware they are OSHW and so the complete design is open source.
the designs are under the "attribution" style licenses, forcing you to advertise as part of the product. as such they are *not* libre licensed. if the designs were released under a GPL license it would be a different matter.
really?
yes.
"provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice; keep intact all notices stating that this License and any non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code; keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all recipients a copy of this License along with the Program." in GPLv3
"provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program." in GPLv2
so that's in the source code.
Not very different from the Attribution clause in https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode
attribution clauses require you to advertise *on the product*.
that's utterly different from requiring to maintain the copyright notice and the fact that there is a license *in the source code*.
if you're not familiar with or don't clearly understand the difference, look up the history behind why the Debian Team renamed firefox to "iceweasel".
l.