Yeah, that's basically it. Physical, practical, functional ideas are only covered by patents. If something works, the fact that it works is not controlled. Copyright allows you to control the description that you fixed in a medium using some amount of artistic effort. But if someone uses their own artistic effort to reproduce the idea in a medium they have copyright on their own version.
Great articles and discussion, thanks!I was amazed to read Stallman say:"Copyright doesn't cover physical circuits, so when people build instances of the circuit, the design's license will have no legal effect on what they do with the devices they have built."So provided someone is prepared to transcribe your device into their own EDA files, they can just copy it, modify it, commercialise it - without restrictions (like NC or ND) that you might want to apply? Can this be correct?!GarethOn 15 January 2016 at 17:00, Jason Flynn G7OCD <flynnjs@yahoo.com> wrote:I'm going to stick my neck out here as someone who regularly makes NC and ND contribution to the community. It's unhelpful and unpleasant having people class your work as second class because of some other peoples' arbitrary redefinition of the word open. There are a lot of greedy and selfish people out there and my efforts to put my works in the public domain are for then general good and not to fuel such people who offer nothing to society in return.It doesn't mean that my efforts can never be moved forward or turned to profit but it does allow me to vet the intentions of those that I let do so.
_______________________________________________
oshug mailing list
oshug@oshug.org
http://oshug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/oshug
_______________________________________________
oshug mailing list
oshug@oshug.org
http://oshug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/oshug