I'm OK with this. I don't know if we even have any commercial boards on our made with KiCad page. I'm really not trying to stir up controversy here. I merely want to protect the best interests of the project.
Wayne On 11/3/2015 9:36 AM, Adam Wolf wrote: > It might be easier to agree on a policy for projects where they provide > KiCad design files, and figure out the policy for ones where they don't > later. > > Cut the problem in half, and tackle the easy one :) > > Adam Wolf > Cofounder and Engineer > Wayne and Layne > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Wayne Stambaugh <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > On 11/3/2015 5:09 AM, Javier Serrano wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Wayne Stambaugh <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> I know it's noisy but I want developer input on this as well as website > >> developer input. I think the developers have a right to know how their > >> work is being used and have a say in it. The CERN folks may want some > >> say on this as well and I'm not sure they see the website mailing list > >> stuff. > > > > Hi, if I understand well the debate is not really about how we allow > > our work to be used, but rather about what to host or link to in the > > website and the conditions thereof. As to the former, by including a > > GPL2+ or GPL3+ header in our sources we agree that they be used in any > > way which complies with those licenses. As to the latter, I have no > > strong opinion on the subject, and will agree with whatever you guys > > decide. I do have a slight preference for not requiring funding in > > exchange of linking because that could open a can of worms. For > > instance, we could be faced with a situation where a project we don't > > want to advertise (for whatever reason) expects linking just because > > they funded KiCad development. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Javier > > > > I'm not requiring funding. I'm just throwing it out as an option for > commercial products to get on the "Made with KiCad" page without > mentioning KiCad on there website. We need to have some show of good > faith that a board was actually designed with KiCad. If the company > that produced that board with KiCad is not willing to at least state > publicly that they used KiCad (something like the "powered by Apache > logo") to design the board, we shouldn't be in the business of giving > them free advertising. It also puts the burden of proof that they used > KiCad on them. In other words, they are making the claim. Not us. I > can foresee a situation where someone claims that there board was design > with KiCad to get some open source/hardware good will when in fact they > didn't use KiCad. This puts KiCad in a potentially embarrassing > situation that I would like to avoid. There would be no expectation of > funding. Only an expectation of good will. > > Cheers, > > Wayne > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
