Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Best Open Source License For Hardware?

Posted by kdawson on from the not-a-core-in-the-world dept.

An anonymous reader writes "MIT recently open-sourced some really cool hardware designs, including an H.264 video decoder and an OFDM transceiver, under MIT's open source license (a.k.a. the X11 license). Now, the OpenCores FAQ recommends that people use either the GPL, LGPL, or modified BSD license; they do not mention the MIT license at all. And, according to the Free Software Foundation the GPL license can be used for hardware, but they do not list the LPGL, modified BSD, or MIT licenses as suitable for non-software. Would you or your company use hardware source-released under the MIT license? What's the best license to use for releasing hardware?"

5 of 125 comments (clear)

  1. WARNING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    WARNING! If you do not use the CORRECTLY APPROVED license then MICROSOFT can STEAL your hardware! That's what they did with BSD and why there IS NO BSD ANYMORE!

  2. Re:What's the best licence? by dvice_null · · Score: 2, Funny

    Blue

  3. Re:What's the best licence? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... No, Yellow (fling)...AAAAAGH!

  4. Looking at the tagging system... by Daimanta · · Score: 3, Funny

    It appears that Slashdot advocates a so called hardhack license. Does anyone have more info about it?

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  5. Re:Follow-up Question... by dotancohen · · Score: 3, Funny

    What's the best open-source license to use for biological innovations and strains? The WMD license.
    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.