Probably almost all. There are many forums for different products that are made by a for profit company. Look at the X carve or Shaper Origin Forums for example. I could be wrong but Maslow probabaly (hopefully) made a great deal of profit off this idea.
1 Like
@Bar, you CAN do both AND laugh all the way to the bank/credit union/coop/state collective farm/kibbutz/dead tour
1 Like
I like the āMaslow: kit by ____ā nomenclature. Donāt use fork as it is meaningless to the general public.
On GPL: I am not sure what is meant by this. As far as I know the list of kit components is not GPL, and cannot be, so I presume that GC + firmware is what was meant. Note that neither can the license of the current version of these be revoked, nor can any future development legally be changed to another license without agreement of most or all copyright holders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_relicensing
In most cases it is easier to re-implement from scratch than to get these agreements. And at that point I would contend that the machine is no longer a Maslow, and should not be referred to as such.
It is hard enough to try to support software questions for code where we have the source available, that I donāt think that we want to be in the position of supporting code that we have no knowledge of.
Recap: to me, āMaslow: kit by ___ā should refer to any combination of hardware that works with the combination of software generated by the community, and that this software should be open source for community support to be meaningful.
1 Like
āAsking forkers to keep the GPL license would stifle innovationā
Not at all. The whole point of the GPL is to guarantee that everyone has the right to innovate. And you donāt need to ask; you just license your stuff as GPL, and the law will ask, nicely or otherwise.
forkers are REQUIRED to keep the GNU license, otherwise they have no permission
to use the contributions from the community that are clearly under that license.
Thatās not up for debate. If they donāt want to use the code (re-write
everything from scratch), they donāt have to comply with the license.
David Lang
1 Like
You have to police the use of the trademark or loose it, so anyone wanting to
use the maslow name for their product should need your approval.
That approval should be pretty much automatic as long as itās vaugely related.
now, āDesigned to be used with a Maslowā does not require approval
but āReplacement Maslow motor shieldā would (and it would be good to send you
one to validate compatibility, but not always a requirement)
David Lang
1 Like
Would you still have a company named Maslow? Did you have a company named Maslow?
1 Like
didnāt realize the GPL was for the software only, I thought it was for the whole system. Which includes custom laser cut parts, motors, etc.
I was assuming we were talking about forkers making any of their custom hardware parts all open source as well.
Official amateur opinionā¦
@bar can sell/release/share the āOfficial Maslow Kitā. That can be expanded to version 1.0, 2.0 etc as needed.
Anything anyone else offers can be listed as āMaslow compatibleā and must include the GNU.
Maslow is copyrighted, but to what level? USA, North America, World? Thatās where china steps inā¦āoh, your copyright is only North America. We make cheaperā.
1 Like
āThe Maslow Beeā Love It!
2 Likes
the maslow code and designs are copyrighted (but avaiable under the GPL)
the name āMaslowā is a trademark (in the category of equipment or something like
that, not in all uses).
Trademarks need to be policed or you loose them, so there needs to be a way of
allowing people to use the name under specific conditions, and of people asking
to use the name under other conditions.
David Lang
1 Like
@bar my interest in seeing the project continue are based on equal parts innovation and maintaining open source/simple systems. I suspect that if you retained sole use of the name for the business/organization, but allowed its use for individual products that met your base design goals/criteria it would quickly become a Xerox issue. In their case that was bad (according to my Marketing professors), however in your scenario that might be a really good thing. People xerox things all the time and we know what they meanā¦the trick is focusing on ensuring that outcome here means what you want it too.
As for straight up licensing the name, if you donāt need or want the money there is no value in doing it. The only reason I would license the name when everything about your product is open source is what??? If you are being told its to increase sales potential thats disingenuous. The only business reason for them to do that is to lock up the market. If they can stop competitors from referencing the Maslow name they will in the short run control the market and will in so doing stifle innovation or worse like Makerbot erode the loyal open source community that made them what they are.
2 Likes
Write a set of guidelines for how people should use the Maslow name as a royalty-free license agreement. Iām sure the community could help if needed. You probably will never need to even threaten legal enforcement. The community will put pressure on anyone breaking it.
3 Likes
Hey Bee, Sorry, but I misunderstood the open source concept. I have just cancelled the ebay listing and edited my original post to reflect that I was mistaken to offer this.
Jim,
I am not saying you are wrong or it is wrong. Iām saying this is where the sticky part comes in for the group. I would offer Bumper stickers and Shirts because Iām proud of my Maslow. Iām free to do this for myself. Am I free to do it for profit? My use of the logo has been with clear markings āAn independent effortā. My discussions before using the logo was that it is clear Iām not acting on behalf of Maslow. Is it a Maslow product or a Bee product? This is why I have clearly kept the Blue Smoke Herder Shield clear of the term āMaslow Shieldā I would like to consider calling it āMaslow Brains by Beeā in a future rendition. With the change over in who is handling kits this gets sticky as in I donāt want to muddy the waters and be clear what I do and what someone else does. I can say I reached out and asked before I went forward.
I did not mean to stop you, just to point out we are in uncharted waters.
I donāt have the right to tell you or anyone here what to do unless it involves me directly.
I applaud both your effort and enthusiasm.
Iām attempting to fuel the discussion of what we choose as group.
Iām sorry if I made you feel attacked or wrong.
Thank you
5 Likes
Maslow Bloom by Bee 
3 Likes