On Mar 22, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: > On 03/22/2012 06:38 AM, Opendous Support wrote: >>>>> Footprints are not subject to copyright either. >>>>> They are not creative: ... they are simple data >>>>> gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. >> Copyright is designed to protect the "original expression of ideas, >> and not the ideas themselves". For example, if you take a photograph >> of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright >> owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed >> and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own >> the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own >> the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your >> design. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine >> >> Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be >> Copyrighted since "copy[right] covers only the expression of the >> definition, not the circuit itself". In other words, someone can redo >> your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the >> Copyright owners of that work. >> http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF >> http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml >> http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW >> >>>> I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed >>>> by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. >> That is the most sensible attitude. >> >>> It's not worth worrying about: really. >> Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade >> use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my >> library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative >> Commons Public Domain Dedication: >> http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ >> >> If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted >> simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic >> symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing >> to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of >> an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of >> redoing the work. >> >> -Matt > > > Great posting Matt. > > We do have pending opportunities to formulate a strategy. So I think a > plodding dialog is > harmless and good. For example, we will be moving to s-expressions for > schematic and > board stuff (parts, footprints, schematics and boards). > > Some interesting questions that I hope will stimulate some thinking, and > eventually some > responses: > > > 1) What are we to conclude when a "conversion program" changes the expression > of an idea > (to s-expressions)? Sounds not to be a copyright violation during the > conversion, but an > opportunity to re-establish a specific license or posture on the converted > work. Normally translation (language-wise) are covered under copyright. So I think that means that GPL remains GPL, if the GPL can be asserted on symbol/footprint libraries. >From reading the opinions in this thread it seems it can be licensed with the >GPL. Whether or not a schema using a symbol then has to be GPL-ed is something >which is unclear to me, and I wonder if the answer will be the same for each >country where KiCad is used.
> 2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and > footprints to add > value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy* use in other > software packages? > How important is this on a scale of 1-10? 0. I think we should allow other programs to import/convert KiCad libraries. I have already seen people switching to Eagle because they feel it has the most complete library, even though they could import them. In my opinion, having a "neutral" license for parts and footprints is adding value to KiCad. > 3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their work in parts and > footprints? Are > they sufficient? I think a "upload part/footprint" to KiCad button or the ability to share your libraries with (something like git/bzr) would be an incentive. This would allow a reseller (adafruit, rs, farnell, etc) to publish the parts/footprint in their libraries and you would add their "repo" as a library resource (or clone it). I think what is stopping people (guilty) from sharing parts and footprints is in the ease of submission. /Martijn _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
