EEVblog #921 - Open Source Hardware Problems Solved!

There are a few big problems with Open Source Hardware and usage of the Gear logo. Dave has a new solution, make it more like Creative Commons!

Download the new logo here:

UPDATE: it would be really cool if there was an auto-generator website like the Creative Commons Logo. Pick your options and it creates the logo with the letters below the symbol.

Support the EEVblog through Patreon!

EEVblog Amazon Store (Dave gets a cut):

[kevpatt]

You are EXACTLY right. Something along the lines of customizable CC licensing would be perfect. Sometimes we want to open up a board layout but we can't open up the firmware. Or vice versa. For example: sometimes the firmware includes closed-source code from an upstream vendor which cannot be opened. But if the board and/or schematic can still be released as open-source, then people are free to build on the design and maybe even eventually replace the closed-source firmware. Good on ya, mate!

[bardenegri]

Could just use dots instead of letters on a silkscreen, assuming the cogs always have the same letter in the same position it would be just as clear. A dot could be visible on a silkscreen down to very small sizes.

[ElectronicsAustralia]

Great idea Dave. Love your reworked open source logo "indicator"

[Vibinator]

Wow dave! such a simple solution yet so useful :o

[emanuele]

So if I release a NOT_OPEN Product, I have to use the original logo... XD

[HighTreason]

The only improvement I can think of is to instead have a community driven database. This would exist online and operate a little like Wikipedia, in that anyone can add or edit information or confirm it to be accurate, but otherwise much more simple than a true Wiki. Every piece of hardware could be given a unique ID number to make it easier and searching the database would show photos, list a few identifying details and display a table of which attributes of the license it was released under. Probably any relevant links too for good measure. Of course, implementing such a thing would not be so easy and is not infallible.

[maxine_red]

Great idea here Dave!
I'm going to use the letter gear on my future designs.

[otopico]

This is great idea. I hope people adopt it. Simple and it keeps the logo we all love.

[Zyphera]

This was like a history and philosophy lesson to me. Thanks Dave.

[nathantron]

This is actually a genius idea and it's simple to do. As long as people decided it's user friendly, this should catch on very easily. I support ya Dave, keep it up. I hope people share this.

[MichaelKathke]

Not only is the EEVBlog one of my favorites. The commercials youtube selected for me here in Germany are now always from engineering companies too. Very interesting and big thumbs up! ;-)

[lednerg]

Sounds similar to the Creative Commons scheme, something which I quite like.

[MetalPhreakAU]

As long as everyone sticks to the SPFMDBC order, you can just have the appropriate gear segments filled in if complying, and just an outline of the segment if not. That would make it easy even for a small logo on the silkscreen.

[bensthingsthoughts]

This is a brilliant idea !!
I have used the open gear in the past without all the requirements but this is perfect, when you only have schematic files for example !!

[John_Ridley]

OK hands up. Who else was trying to make the gear spell something very rude?

[grandpacocky]

Keep going, Dave I'am on the cusp of using that voice to power a lawn mower!

[jeffreymarshall]

Dave,

In the software world, 'open source' has a nice benchmark, in that it requires source code (rather than build artifacts) in order to satisfy the definition for 'open source' (if not 'libre source').

I suspect that a lot of bad feelings have developed when one person says 'open hardware', and means 'I've shared the gerber files', while another person says "I've shared the verilog code for the fpga" and think they mean the same things. I hope that some better communication (as per your video) gains traction in the hardware world.

[Thegods]

When I heard you talking about this problem my mind instantly went to having separate "cells" for each piece of the gear. Turned out it was similar to your idea with the major difference being you start with an empty outline and fill in what you open source. This way if you are going to only partial open you can stripe or partial fill the cell. I like your idea, makes it clear without having to remember which spot means what, you can just look and understand.

[GpanosXP]

I really don't get the original OSH idea.
Option 1: You keep everything closed, sell your hardware, give the user no chance to modify/ hack/ adapt your product.
Option 2: You release everything, let everyone produce and sell your creation. If it catches on, you get to see a ton of Chinese clone boards mass produced at near cost prices you can't compete with.
Anyone care to explain the reasoning behind this definition ?

What if you want to avoid other people capitalizing on your hard work, yet give schematics, firmware, repair info but no production files ? Why isn't this to be considered "open" ?
I think Dave's proposal covers this really well.

[SethHunter]

I was at the OSHWA Summit last year when Micheal announced the certification proposal and read a lot of the reactions and the EMSL blogs regarding the logo. What I like about this proposal is the clarity it provides while not dividing the community. I'll be at OSHWA in Portland next week. I'm curious to see if the community there is linked to EEVBlog - I found out about Amphour from folks I met last year there.