An anonymous reader writes "MIT recently open sourced (http://csg.csail.mit.edu.nyud.net/oshd/index.html) some really cool hardware designs, including an H.264 video decoder and an OFDM transceiver, under MIT's open source license (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php).
Any thoughts on the MIT license? According to the OpenCores FAQ (http://www.opencores.org/faq.cgi/section/4/4.1#4.1), they recommend that people use either the GPL, LGPL or modified BSD license. They do not mention the MIT (aka X11) license at all.
And, according to GNU (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#OtherLicenses) the GPL license can be used for hardware, but they do not list the LPGL, modified BSD or MIT (aka X11) licenses as suitable for non-software.
Here's all this advanced hardware released under the MIT license, but OpenCores and GNU don't mention the MIT license in relation to hardware — would you/your company use hardware source released under this license? What's the best license to use for releasing hardware?" Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
"Card readers? We don't need no stinking card readers."
-- Peter da Silva (at the National Academy of Sciencies, 1965, in a
particularly vivid fantasy)
What's the best open source license for hardware? 0 Comments More Login /
Get More Comments