It's so sad to see how caught up they are in the details. I'm following development of the Sharism NanoNote and the project leaders there have such a different view: we're just building stuff and sharing as much as possible because we think that's good. They're not worried about being "taken advantage of" or what license should be used for this or that and are focused entirely on building a sustainable practising community of open hardware developers where stuff is actually being made. It's refreshing and productive.
The FSF's guidelines feel so much like they were thought up in a vacuum. Does anyone know if they tried to discuss them with any of the existing open hardware projects before publishing them? I'd be interested to know if they just did it without consulting anybody or if it turns out that the existing open hardware projects just aren't open enough.