Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by phoronixrly | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

phoronixrly

> even "open source" parts are going to be under non-commercial license (CC BY-NC-SA) anyway

You're saying this as if it is a bad thing? I absolutely welcome this decision by the authors!

View on HN

Non commercial licenses are not generally considered open source

Yes

But how important?

If it is not an open source license, you should not call it open source.

Imagine someone saying the same thing about MongoDB's license, for example.

Is there a Linux server run on fully open source hardware (what would that mean btw?)? Should we stop using "open source" because almost all computers are not fully open source?

Quite a lot of open source hardware is licensed under the BY-SA Creative Commons license which is an actual open source license. E.g. the Arduinos and things like the Milkymist One which can actually run linux.

What are you even trying to say? The fact that this is hardware isn't what makes it non-open source, there's plenty of open source hardware out there. The thing that makes it not-open-source is that the license is non-commercial.

If you can't legally use the product, the fact that the source is available is meaningless. CC-NC is a source available license, not an open source license.

A Raspberry Pi running any flavor of linux, right?

Why? Restricting it in this way doesn't make sense to me.

If we have a common design them surely we want people to be able to build their own, or buy a prebuilt?

Why is the CC BY-NC-SA stopping me to build my own?

dmca?

I didn't say it did.

If it is a noncommercial licence then it removes the other option to set up a business selling these pre-built. Not everyone wants to build a printer.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en

> NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

I mean, the licence says that I can't...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com