CC licence and VESC

[akiraEC]

I would like to raise a discussion regarding the coverage of Creative Common licence and PCBs in projets.

When a project is released using the CC licence (software, firmware, BOM, schematics and PCBs), is it compliant to modify it and NOT publish the PCB files ?
To my understanding it is not. The CC licence is made to impose that any modification to the design has to be shared. And all parts of the original licenced product have to be redistributed. This includes the schematics, the firmware, and the PCB. The spirit of the licence is to allow people to reproduce the new design in the same conditions as the original one.

Looking on the internet, it seems that I am not the only one sharing this opinion :

Regarding open-source and hardware : http://www.oshwa.org/faq/

Unfortunately, the original design files for hardware are often in proprietary formats for expensive software tools. In this case, it’s helpful and encouraged to also offer versions of the design in alternative or intermediate formats that can be viewed or edited with common or free programs. For example, PDFs of circuit schematics, **Gerbers for circuit board layouts**, and IGES or STL files for mechanical objects. These allow people without access to expensive or proprietary software to make at least some use of your design. Please note, however, that this is not a substitute for releasing the original files – the core of open-source hardware practice.

The CC licence says :
ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
The PCB is a clear contribution and it has to be shared.

[MagiicHat]

My understanding is that IF you choose to distribute any modifications you've made, you must do so under CC license. But you are under obligation to share what you have done.

But I'm not a lawyer.

[s28400]

Hmm, this is an interesting point. So if you were to make a different board layout, you would have to share it. I know a handful of designs that are modified that have not been shared lol.

[MrDude_1]

Hmm, this is an interesting point. So if you were to make a different board layout, you would have to share it. I know a handful of designs that are modified that have not been shared lol.

Considering there is absolutely no enforcement of any of this... does it even matter?

[WeeChumlee]

I presume this is all coming from the questions about the new Enertion ESC. If so let us please not cover this on this forum as well, it is pretty pointless on the "other" forum as well.
MrDude got it down in a single sentence.

[sl33py]

even un-related to the -X debacle... It's a great topic i think.

If you build a similar "widget" as someone else, and use different components, with different features... even if the schematic is roughly the same - does CC apply?

Also - MrDude_1 - your signature made me almost spit coffee. Too true and funny.

[bandaro]

Hahaha, I can guess who the "Who" and "other" forum is, and it comes as no surprise. Given the price it is sure to be sold at, I just hope that the initial developer/s and everyone are getting at least 50% of the profit. But again, one can guess the answer here I feel.

But yes, as far as my understanding goes, there is no legal enforcing of the CC anyway, especially internationally. It's just a moral code - selfish or selfless.

[chuttney1]

By general consensus per CC licence guidelines. Stuff can be shared as long no one is making money off of it. Enforcement of those rules is binding in the "community" sense in hopes of disseminating knowledge to the mass, but frowned upon if you copy stuff without citation of source. It's not really binding in a "business" sense because I have not heard of a single court case where a company violates CC licenses to make profit and "no legal enforcement" as Bandaro said in comment above this one.

I know it's redundant for what I typed, but serves as a summary.