this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2025
57 points (98.3% liked)

Open Source

41417 readers
136 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm uncertain if the GPLv3 ^[1]^, or something from Creative Commons ^[3]^, like the CC-BY-SA ^[2]^ license, would be appropriate for open source hardware. I've come across the CERN-OHL-S ^[4]^, which appears interesting, but I've never encountered it in the wild, so I'm wary of it's apparent obscurity.

References

  1. Type: Webpage. Title: "GNU General Public License". Publisher: "GNU Operating System". Accessed: 2025-09-04T21:29Z. URI: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html.
  2. Type: Webpage. Title: "Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International". Publisher: "Creative Commons". Accessed: 2025-09-04T21:30Z. URI: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en.
  3. Type: Webpage. Title: "About CC Licenses". Publisher: "Creative Commons". Accessed: 2025-04-09T21:31Z. URI: https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/cclicenses/.
  4. Type: Text. Title: "CERN Open Hardware Licence Version 2 - Strongly Reciprocal". Publisher: "CERN". Accessed: 2025-04-09T21:33Z. URI: https://gitlab.com/ohwr/project/cernohl/-/wikis/uploads/819d71bea3458f71fba6cf4fb0f2de6b/cern_ohl_s_v2.txt.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago
License Type Example License(s) Can someone “pull the ladder up” after building on your work? Can you integrate their improvements freely? Notes
🟥 Strong Copyleft CERN-OHL-S, GPLv3 ❌ No — downstream must open their changes ✅ Yes — everyone must share improvements Keeps the community free, but restricts proprietary use
🟧 Weak Copyleft CERN-OHL-W, LGPL ⚠️ Limited — changes to original must be open, but addons can be closed ✅ Mostly — improvements to original are open Allows extensions/plugins to be proprietary
🟨 Permissive CERN-OHL-P, Solderpad, MIT ✅ Yes — downstream can close everything ❌ No — unless you get permission, you can't use their closed changes Maximizes adoption, but allows ladder-pulling
🟦 Dual Licensing GPL + commercial, or CLA-based ⚠️ Controlled — you allow copyleft for the public, but retain rights for commercial licensing ✅ Yes — you retain full rights via CLA Good if you want community contributions and a commercial option
Documentation-only (CC-BY, etc.) CC-BY, CC-BY-SA ⚠️ Depends — not designed for functional hardware, may not protect source ❌ Unclear — source availability not enforceable Use only for manuals, not functional designs