Occupy Thingiverse Plaque - Keep Open Source OPEN
Derived from
Description
Instructions
thingiverse.com/legal Section 3.2 & 3.3 specifically.
Opens source used to mean this:
youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=54X28qSbKf4
Hmmm....
You must be logged in to post a comment.
tea[tempest]pot
Maybe, but I remember this post a couple of years ago chastising and openly calling out a small company called Techzone (which is no longer even in business). This article might have helped them fail much quicker.
http://www.makerbot.com/blog/2...
"Sometimes an individual or a company makes a derivative of an open source project, goes to market with it and then doesn’t share their derivative designs with their changes. This is not only against the license, but it’s also not ethical. It is a dead end for the innovation and development which is the heart of the open source hardware community."
"At MakerBot, we take open source seriously. It’s a way of life for us. We share our design files when we release a project because we know that it’s important for our users to know that a MakerBot is not a black box. With MakerBot, you get not only a machine that makes things for you, but you also get an education into how the machine works and you can truly own it and have access to all the designs that went into it! When people take designs that are open and they close them, they are creating a dead end where people will not be able to understand their machines and they will not be able to develop on them." The "way of life" seems to have done an about face.
I especially like the line " MakerBot is not a black box." Apparently now it is both literally and figuratively.
"Open source hardware relies on ethics to work. It’s possible to legally chase down folks who break the terms of a license but in most cases the community will usually take care of it by confronting derivatives and not buying from individuals and companies that are building on others work and not releasing their source." - They touted open source, as long as it made them money, but quickly changed direction when it seems to profit them. I'm not against closed source companies or products, but you can't claim one thing and operate in an entirely different manner, unless you are hypocritical.
and finally, "The door is still open for them to make this right." Bre's own words. Was he right then, or now?
3.2. states: You agree to irrevocably waive (and cause to be waived) any claims and
assertions of moral rights or attribution with respect to your User
Content.
There is the problem.
"...solely for the purposes of including your User Content in the Site and Services."
what's the problem?
These rights are required to operate thingiverse itself.
You can't make files downloadable and create preview images and allow others to upload derived works without having the license to do so.
It seems to be written way too broadly though:
- It's not just Thingiverse, but also its unnamed "affiliates and partners"
- It's irrevocable, so even if you post an object and then try to remove it later, they can say "screw you!"
- "solely for the purposes of including your User Content in ... Services" could mean a lot of things. Like giving advertizing partners the rights to use work in ads?
- WTF is up with waiving any rights to attribution?
License
More from beekeeper
More from 3D Printing Tests
nice design -- but the lack of source files included with the stl deters me from printing this part.
Edit: Not that I can blame you. Posting only the stl file to thingiverse and linking to a github or bitbucket page for the source would be a better option these days.