[OH Updates] $2.5 mil in funding, but must open source -- and upverter making the rounds...

[Bruce Perens]

On 09/14/2011 07:06 PM, Andrew Stone wrote:
> In that model I proposed I was intending to do OSS.  So I suppose if 
> you really wanted to not share your designs you could just DL the code 
> and comment out the portion of the code that uploads your designs. 
Yes, because the upload requirement can't be enforced in a true Open 
Source license, due to the Open Source Definition language that prevents 
restriction of a particular field of endeavor.

The reason I put that field of endeavor language in was that I was using 
Berkeley SPICE, the analog circuit simulator, and there was a provision 
in SPICE that disallowed its use by the Police of South Africa. But by 
1997 Apartheid was dead, and those police were black, but the license 
provision still existed! And thus achieved the exact opposite of what 
was planned.

Maybe we can convince those guys to dual-license their online tool as I 
proposed for LexisNexis. But not sure it would drive profit for them as 
it did for LN.

     Thanks

     Bruce