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

Open Source

41398 readers
843 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
Cloak@lemmy.ml
kevincox@lemmy.ml
CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml
57
What license(s) do you recommend, and/or not recommend, for open source hardware, and why? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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
[–] Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

[…] OP tell me your conclusion for best hardware licence when you get there.

I think I'm just going to go with CERN-OHL-S ^[1]^. I have yet to find anything better, and @ganymede@lemmy.ml raised some good points regarding it ^[2]^, imo.

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: Post (Comment). Author: "@ganymede@lemmy.ml". Publisher: [Type: Post. Title: "What license(s) do you recommend, and/or not recommend, for open source hardware, and why?". Author: "@Kalcifer" ("@Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works"). Publisher: ["Lemmy". "sh.itjust.works". "Open Source" ("!opensource@lemmy.ml")]. Published: 2025-09-04T21:35:12Z. URI: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45415245.]. Published: 2025-09-05T01:57:25Z. Accessed: 2025-09-16T05:42Z. URI: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45415245/20822528.

    imo i wouldn’t overlook CERN too much due to apparent obscurity. that’s CERN as in WWW & LHC.

    plus it’s specifically designed for hw, unlike most of the others which are more likely to lean sw centric? […]

[–] DrDystopia@lemy.lol 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Dang, good job and thanks for following up! 🎇👏😯

[–] Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 weeks ago

[…] thanks for following up! […]

You're welcome 😊