Comments on: OSE License for Post Scarcity Economics http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/ Building tools for replicable, open source, post-scarcity resilient communities Sat, 17 Dec 2011 14:49:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Open Source Soil Pulverizer – Prototype II | Factor E Farm Blog http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-91028 Open Source Soil Pulverizer – Prototype II | Factor E Farm Blog Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:31:33 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-91028 [...] Label - a product label for post-scarcity economics – pursuant to OSE Specifications and the OSE License for Post-Scarcity Economics. Here is the descriptive label for the Soil [...] [...] Label – a product label for post-scarcity economics – pursuant to OSE Specifications and the OSE License for Post-Scarcity Economics. Here is the descriptive label for the Soil [...]

]]> By: Open Product Development Pipeline | Open Source Ecology http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-89307 Open Product Development Pipeline | Open Source Ecology Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:16:36 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-89307 [...] have proposed the scalable, Open Product Development Pipeline methodology over a year ago. It’s merely a formalization of an actual process, which we [...] [...] have proposed the scalable, Open Product Development Pipeline methodology over a year ago. It’s merely a formalization of an actual process, which we [...]

]]> By: Christian Siefkes http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-88626 Christian Siefkes Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:07:34 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-88626 You should make sure that your license corresponds to the new <a href="http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW" rel="nofollow">Open Source Hardware Definition</a>. Specifically, point 9 “License Must Not Be Specific to a Product” comes to mind, which means that you cannot talk specifically about “OSE” as “we” in the license itself (though of course in some accompanying manifest or statement of intent). Also you cannot state that “all hacker spaces are authorized resellers of our products”, since, by definition, <em>everybody</em> is allowed to resell open hardware (point 3, Derived Works). You want to rely on ethical rather than legal copyleft (encouraging rather than legally requiring adopters to give back). I think that’s the right decision since <a href="http://www.keimform.de/2009/the-tricky-business-of-copylefting-hardware/" rel="nofollow">my own research indicates</a> that there simply is no reliable way to enforce a legal copyleft on hardware. However, in this case there seems to be no need to create yet another license (consider the evils of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License_proliferation" rel="nofollow">license proliferation</a>). So maybe you could just stick to the Creative Commons Attribution license? (If you don’t care about attribution, the <a href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php" rel="nofollow">MIT License</a> or the <a href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php" rel="nofollow">BSD License</a> would be other good choices). You should make sure that your license corresponds to the new Open Source Hardware Definition. Specifically, point 9 “License Must Not Be Specific to a Product” comes to mind, which means that you cannot talk specifically about “OSE” as “we” in the license itself (though of course in some accompanying manifest or statement of intent). Also you cannot state that “all hacker spaces are authorized resellers of our products”, since, by definition, everybody is allowed to resell open hardware (point 3, Derived Works).

You want to rely on ethical rather than legal copyleft (encouraging rather than legally requiring adopters to give back). I think that’s the right decision since my own research indicates that there simply is no reliable way to enforce a legal copyleft on hardware. However, in this case there seems to be no need to create yet another license (consider the evils of license proliferation). So maybe you could just stick to the Creative Commons Attribution license? (If you don’t care about attribution, the MIT License or the BSD License would be other good choices).

]]> By: Getting Ready To Build: A Better Future | Open Source Ecology http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-87789 Getting Ready To Build: A Better Future | Open Source Ecology Sat, 24 Jul 2010 08:18:23 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-87789 [...] Our initial negotiations as above may lead to a first, economically-significant instance of open business model replication. Careful documentation would be built into such a package, as such documentation is [...] [...] Our initial negotiations as above may lead to a first, economically-significant instance of open business model replication. Careful documentation would be built into such a package, as such documentation is [...]

]]> By: Open Source 150 Ton Hole Puncher | Open Source Ecology http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-87690 Open Source 150 Ton Hole Puncher | Open Source Ecology Sat, 24 Jul 2010 02:05:56 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-87690 [...] technology, as the waste cycle is replaced with lifetime design. We discussed this somewhat in our last blog post Categories: Accomplishments, Community Supported Manufacturing, Fabrication Optimization, [...] [...] technology, as the waste cycle is replaced with lifetime design. We discussed this somewhat in our last blog post Categories: Accomplishments, Community Supported Manufacturing, Fabrication Optimization, [...]

]]> By: Ted http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-87040 Ted Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:44:39 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-87040 Can't argue against the sharing idea especially in a post scarcity world. Good luck and if I have anything worth while to add to the project I'll be back. Can’t argue against the sharing idea especially in a post scarcity world. Good luck and if I have anything worth while to add to the project I’ll be back.

]]> By: Demented Chihuahua http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-86926 Demented Chihuahua Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:15:59 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-86926 Hmm, I agree with Karl. This seems much more like a manifesto than a license. Not bad ideas but certainly not a licence. Demented Hmm, I agree with Karl. This seems much more like a manifesto than a license. Not bad ideas but certainly not a licence.

Demented

]]> By: mimarob http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-86848 mimarob Mon, 19 Jul 2010 08:01:32 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-86848 One must remember that large companies and governments are basically power structures. Inventing things like this is against there nature since it would diminish their power. What would really get things cooking (literally) is the flash steam engine, then one could have large amounts of energy for construction when the sun peeks and rely on the orders-of-magnitude less efficient biomass for heat in the cold season. One must remember that large companies and governments are basically power structures. Inventing things like this is against there nature since it would diminish their power.

What would really get things cooking (literally) is the flash steam engine, then one could have large amounts of energy for construction when the sun peeks and rely on the orders-of-magnitude less efficient biomass for heat in the cold season.

]]> By: Karl http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-86836 Karl Mon, 19 Jul 2010 05:39:05 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-86836 Marcin, that seems more like a manifesto than a license. I notice that the OSE License v0.1 6.12.10 on your Wiki contains the words "...we contribute all of our work into the public domain...", which are now missing. That wording made your intent very clear. Why did you remove it? If that is still your intent, then I don't think that calling this a license is accurate, since as I understand it, things placed in the public domain are not licensed (by definition). Marcin, that seems more like a manifesto than a license. I notice that the OSE License v0.1 6.12.10 on your Wiki contains the words “…we contribute all of our work into the public domain…”, which are now missing. That wording made your intent very clear. Why did you remove it? If that is still your intent, then I don’t think that calling this a license is accurate, since as I understand it, things placed in the public domain are not licensed (by definition).

]]> By: Nick http://blog.opensourceecology.org/2010/07/ose-license-for-post-scarcity-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-86390 Nick Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:45:41 +0000 http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=2110#comment-86390 Very inspiring Marcin, I really hope OSE finds the little bit extra resources needed to make things start to happen. It remains amazing to me that the whole OSE project has been bootstrapped on pretty much nothing when a single grant or large financial investor could potentially create the whole GVCS...... Very inspiring Marcin, I really hope OSE finds the little bit extra resources needed to make things start to happen. It remains amazing to me that the whole OSE project has been bootstrapped on pretty much nothing when a single grant or large financial investor could potentially create the whole GVCS……

]]>