I have not rechecked the final version of GPLv.3 yet, but a copyright
license cannot create copyright subject matter in contravention of the
statute.
I think the most useful way to approach this issue is to clearly state
what problem an open hardware license will solve. As presented, it
seems to be a solution in search of a problem.
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
The SCTL Blog
www.cyberspaces.org
On Jul 5, 2007, at 10:37 PM, Matthew Flaschen <
matthew.flaschen@...
> wrote:
> Brendan Scott (lists) wrote:
>
>> I would guess therefore that a licence for open source hardware would
>> be better expressed in terms of activites.
>
> That doesn't really solve the problem. If the design is not protected
> by some right (copyright, semiconductor mask, etc.), people would be
> free to violate the license. Incidentally, GPLv3 tries to deal with
> hardware by saying "“Copyright” also means copyright-like laws th
> at
> apply to other kinds of works, such as semiconductor masks."
>
> Matthew Flaschen
>
