September 29, 2010
This article was contributed by Jeff & Victoria Osier-Mixon
Free software projects sometimes struggle with licensing
issues. The open hardware community is beginning to face the same kinds of
difficulties with copyrights and patents that the free software community
has grappled with. A
presentation by John Wilbanks at the Open
Hardware Summit (OHS) in New York discussed how these concepts apply to
open hardware, and how to surmount the issues using open-source tenets and a
"commons" of patent tools and free licenses.
Open hardware is a relatively new concept. The OpenCores
project and website started in 1999, primarily as a collecting point for
Verilog IP description files, but produced no actual hardware. SPARC
enthusiasts remember when Sun "open-sourced" the SPARC implementation,
leading to the OpenSPARC processors
in 2006. Since then, a large spectrum of devices ranging from basic
electronic designs to microcontrollers up to entire FPGAs has been created
as open source. This means that the designs, in the form of design
documents, CAD files, etc., are open in terms of shared ownership, community
development, ready availability, low or zero cost, and permissive licensing,
just as open-source software describes source code with those same
characteristics.
The legal issues, however, are tricky, as anyone involved in open-source
software can attest. This is particularly true in a field in which an
invention can be protected by either a copyright or a patent, or even a
combination of both, and that copyright or patent can be licensed in a
number of ways. Hardware has traditionally been covered under patents,
although that is changing as hardware is increasingly described with
documentation rather than physical evidence.
The expense of a patent is
beyond the reach of most individuals to obtain and defend — that has
normally been the domain of corporations with lawyers. Even if a creator
wants to open up a design, the cost of getting a patent is
restrictive and
the legal issues around patents are daunting. Copyrights, on the other hand, are
free and applicable to any creative work as soon as it is published, and can
sometimes be applied to hardware design documents.
John Wilbanks is
the VP for Science at Creative
Commons, a non-profit corporation whose stated goal is "making it easier for
people to share and build upon the work of others, consistent with the rules
of copyright." It accomplishes this by providing a set of free licenses and
legal tools to enable creators of hardware, software, documents, and pretty
much anything else copyrightable to "share, remix, use commercially, or any
combination thereof," using the concept of a commons, a traditional
public meeting ground in which resources are collectively owned and/or
shared. Creative Commons is addressing the challenges of open hardware by
creating a commons of patent tools to realize those same goals for patents.
Wilbanks spoke at the OHS about legal issues when open source concepts
are applied to patents. He started by describing the problems with patent
protection and restrictive licenses on "not-open-source hardware" — the
traditional method for protecting hardware inventions:
- incrementalism — incremental innovation based on prior art as
patents expire and are renewed on new versions
- artificial scarcity — the goal of restrictive licenses in
general: to restrict access to something of value in order to make it appear
more valuable, such as Internet access at an expensive hotel
- "thickets of patents" — sets of restrictive patents built on
intertwining layers, making them very difficult and expensive to change or
challenge
At OHS, Wilbanks described an alternative method for both protection and
ensuring the ability to share by creating "zones of prenegotiated patent
rights" in the form of licenses based on language that is agreeable to both
the licensor and the licensee. "The whole issue of commons is coming to open
source hardware" and other fields in terms of a patent tools commons,
a set of licensing tools being developed by Creative Commons. CC has set up
two new
patent tools to help hardware creators who use patents to navigate
through the maze in order to open their designs in a safe way. The
Creative Commons site describes the tools as follows:
- a Research
Non-Assertion Pledge, to be used by patent owners who wish to promote
basic research by committing not to enforce patents against users engaged in
basic non-profit research
- a Model
Patent License, to be used by patent owners who wish to make a public
offer to license their patents on standard terms
"Untested licenses are like uncompiled code," Wilbanks says. "The idea is
to create zones of prenegotiated patent rights, first to begin cutting
through thickets [of patents], second to eliminate problems of scarcity, and
third to really start to get to the point where if you're trying to figure
out what you want to do, you're not exposed" to patent issues. The
Model Patent License in
draft form provides sample language for a public license offer that is
"capable of being accepted by anyone on a non-discriminatory basis and
without additional negotiation," offering benefits to both parties. These
tools enable individuals to approach hardware patents similarly to the ways
corporations have traditionally done, but without the high associated
costs.
Wilbanks believes that open hardware can succeed "when you do legal
licensing around these systems [to] lower the transactional cost, increase
the transparency, and get the need to have a highly skilled lawyer
negotiating on your behalf out of the way." As with software, open
hardware
licensing boils down to the creator's intent. Rather than depending on
safety "from the barrel of a license," Wilbanks says that to
be adequately
protected, open hardware projects should follow some solid basic open-source
principles: start open (as opposed to starting proprietary and open-sourcing
later), publish early and often (to create prior art and encourage sharing,
respectively), and use prenegotiated patent rights to protect both ownership
and the right to share, rather than depending on licenses for protection.
Using licenses and prenegotiated rights lowers the cost of making hardware
open, which also lowers the barrier to entry. Those ideas will be refined
further as the open hardware movement gains traction.
(
Log in to post comments)