Slashdot Mirror

registration doesn't matter... it only counts when calculating damages.

the earliest reference in archive.org for the site with that logo was jan 23, 2002. also found this post who says it was created in 2001:
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/000004.html

Interestingly, opensource.org did not use the logo until June 2002:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020725154922/http://opensource.org/

In fact, that page has an announcement in the sidebar:

*June 2002, Open Source & OSI-Certified marks launched! HTML & Print (color) instructions. Read about our Certification Program.

I would be interested in hearing what OSIs response is.

I'm OSI's current president. Here are the facts that are missing from the OP:

1. OSI has not sent any legal notice to OSHWA, does not want to and has no plans to do so.
2. OSHWA approached OSI last year to ask about the relationship between the OSHW and OSI logos, which their internal discussion had identified as a problem.
3. Since then, there has been an ongoing conversation between OSI & OSHWA. It's not been perfect, but everyone involved is a volunteer doing their best in a complicated situation.
4. Last week OSHWA decided to consult its members/stakeholders about the matter before next steps with OSI.
5. The template trademark agreement from OSI that they published was not a proposal or demand, it was just an example document to assist them in making a proposal to OSI. It was requested by OSHWA prior to a meeting between OSI & OSHWA on June 29.
6. The discussions are ongoing and it's unhelpful to treat this as a conflict; neither OSI's Board nor (as far as I have been told) OSHWA's board do.
7. OSI is very keen indeed to devise an approach that brings maximum benefit to the whole open source community and which builds bridges to strengthen it.
8. When OSHWA's data-gathering ends (August 16) OSI will be ready with a strong proposal that fixes things.

But
yes, there is a problem that Hardware Isn't Generally Copyrightable

W T F ??? you think its bad it isnt copyrightable?

And while I'm following links and posting replies to myself...

http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/general/2011-September/thread.html
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/thread.html

There's some threads in those topics that discuss the logo. Perhaps most specifically:
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/000004.html

I might be reading it wrong, but I guess there's some concern that the winning OSHW logo is too similar to OSI which doesn't fully align with the OH thing so something else was chosen?

Oi.

And while I'm following links and posting replies to myself...

http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/general/2011-September/thread.html
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/thread.html

There's some threads in those topics that discuss the logo. Perhaps most specifically:
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/000004.html

I might be reading it wrong, but I guess there's some concern that the winning OSHW logo is too similar to OSI which doesn't fully align with the OH thing so something else was chosen?

Oi.

And while I'm following links and posting replies to myself...

http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/general/2011-September/thread.html
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/thread.html

There's some threads in those topics that discuss the logo. Perhaps most specifically:
http://lists.openhardware.org/pipermail/legal/2011-September/000004.html

I might be reading it wrong, but I guess there's some concern that the winning OSHW logo is too similar to OSI which doesn't fully align with the OH thing so something else was chosen?

Oi.

Go figure - while I posted that, the page was updated with some further internal links (besides just the journal). My question regarding the name ("Open Hardware" vs "Open Source Hardware") is partially answered in:
http://wiki.openhardware.org/Project:Constitution

I like The TAPR Open Hardware License. But yes, there is a problem that Hardware Isn't Generally Copyrightable. We can deal with the problem by using contract law, sometimes, and imperfectly, and by embedding copyrightable and trademarked content. I have a proposal for this that I've not finished yet, I'll try to get it up on the Open Hardware wiki soon.

but rather for things like OpenHardware. Where hardware is built like it always has been but we just get the specs so drivers etc. can be written and improved.

http://www.openhardware.net

http://www.openhardware.org

Why people can't first research then do any statements?

I didn't seen any Creative Labs products mentioned in Open Hardware Catalog. So, are those really open hardware, or do they just pretend it?

Are these open ala Nvidia and Sblive, "Here's some code but no specs", or are the open ala Matrox g200/400, where you actually have specs and can do useful work beyond optimizing what they give you?

Do manufacturers even know that Certification exists, do they even care?
- If not, it's because nobody asks that certification.
Would you like to use it as definition of openess ... like GPL is now?
- Then we must start using it, then others start asking about it ("Huh, what's that?"), and perhaps it can be become well known denifition.

Are these open ala Nvidia and Sblive, "Here's some code but no specs", or are the open ala Matrox g200/400, where you actually have specs and can do useful work beyond optimizing what they give you?

Do manufacturers even know that Certification exists, do they even care?
- If not, it's because nobody asks that certification.
Would you like to use it as definition of openess ... like GPL is now?
- Then we must start using it, then others start asking about it ("Huh, what's that?"), and perhaps it can be become well known denifition.

This is good news. Let's hope Logitech will apply for Open Hardware certification for these controllers. Open Hardware is a good initiative that unfortunately hasn't received much attention so far.

Vendors of IrDA stuff that aren't as closed minded as Toshiba might want to check this out. It's a nice way to show that you do care about the free software community.