Hi all,
My name is ayah, and i led the development of the Open Hardware Definition, and organized (with Alicia Gibb) the Open Hardware Summit that is referred to in the Definition description. I'm based in NY, but, i'm lebanese and a geek, so I'm excited to join this community!
Let me clear up some questions about Open Hardware posted above.
@kareem_nasser: "From what i understood the idea seems useless knowing that the existence of hacking transforms a closed source hardware to an open source"
and
@xterm: "The concept of Open Hardware eludes me. Couldn't anyone smash down a certain device and learn the schematic and just rebuild it with a few modifications?"
Not exactly. That's like saying looking into a binary or an executable is enough to have access to a piece of software. Hacking is great, and in some cases, an excellent way to peek into the hardware design of a product, and perhaps be able to reverse engineer it. But as soon as the hardware becomes even slightly complex, this becomes impossible. You need schematics, pcb layout, component lists, and sometimes firmware to go on the hardware. The power (and point frankly) of Open Source Hardware is that you can learn from, reproduce, improve and share a piece of hardware.
@kareem_nasser: "I got the point but I still dont find it as something new. For a primary reason that corporations wont ever release their schematics for free if they patented it for like 100 years."
Normally patents are valid for only 20 years, but that's not the point. The point of the movement is to encourage companies, startups, individuals and schools to share their hardware work while still being financially sustainable. It is not a reality yet, and still a form of "activit" movement. But we see A LOT of adoption in the filed, over hundreds of companies doing it and benefiting a lot, see this article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-06/adafruit-targets-tinkerers-with-open-source-electronics-kits.html
@Kassem: "@rahmu: So what about competition? What about product differentiation? Would everything I've learned in my marketing and management courses become nothing but crap now?"
I wouldnt call it "crap", but we are arguing that this type of thinking is of the old world order, and the new world is not like this. Traditionally, people have been sharing and "open sourcing" their inventions for decades, until the patent system came in and stifled the very thing it was born to try to protect. We (and a huge growing industry) are saying that to make a better world, we need better products, better collaboration, better businesses, better thinking. We can all benefit from it, its not mutually exclusive, its raising the bar.
@rahmu: I agree with your first post entirely, but not the second. There are many other business models than licensing, and open hardware projects and companies are figuring out how to pay volunteers/contributors to be able to contribute. Money is VERY important for sustainability and to be able to make good/great/ground breaking work, but it is ultimately not the main reason to get into it. Businesses need to understand that these are often cheape/faster/more efficient models for R&D and then marketing/dissemination of products.
@Kassem: "Open Source hardware would kill competition, literally"
That is a concern, and a difficulty, and that is one of the reasons why we embarked on establishing a definition. Ultimately, Open Hardware is a branding and services game. You get hired for product development, customization, commissions BECAUSE you have established yourself as an expert (or the first) using your open source hardware.
Any licenses out there cannot apply to hardware (only the documentation of hardware). CC licenses are all copyright based, and they don't hold in these cases. So the idea is, if you produce hardware, your only form of protection to date is: 1- patent (incredibly expensive, and ultimately stifles innovation) or 2- being backed by a community and publish/produce often.
This is definitely not a final solution, which is why we are in the early stages of this revolution. And step one is community accepted/agreed upon nomenclature/definition. The problem is not solved (far from it), but many (including CC who showed their commitment by sponsoring the definition, and naming an open hardware fellow -myself) believe it's a very important/interesting one.
wow, this was gonna be a short post and ended up being mega long. Sorry about that, but im psyched people are discussing this in lebanon/the middle east. Keep them coming :)
cheers
ayah
