Re: Hardware license
Walter Landry <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Umm; the .sch and .pcb files are not really source code; they are more
> > like .pdf files. Also, I'm using a GPL rather than BSD license for the
> > traditional philosophical reasons: this is an addition to the commons,
> > rather than a gift to the public domain.
> If the .sch and .pcb files are not the preferred form for making
> modifications, then what is?
The .sch file is only the preferred form for making modifications when
loaded into an application, which presents a rendering of it. You would
*not* edit the .sch file; you would use gschem to work on it. So it's
equivalent to, say, a gimp save-file. The .pcb file is similar.
> Could you distribute that? In that
> case, you could use a slightly modified GPL, where you replace "object
> code" with "non-source derivative works".
> Walter Landry
rich walker | technical person | Shadow Robot Company | email@example.com
front-of-tshirt space to let 251 Liverpool Road |
London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487