Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

burgerone wrote: post #3

Edit: Licensing consists of ARR, Public Domain and MIT. https://github.com/rtestardi/StickOS2/blob/main/license.txt https://github.com/rtestardi/usbte/blob/master/LICENSE

Re: Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

#5

Post by bramhaag » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 4:10 PM UTC

burgerone wrote: post #3

Edit: Licensing consists of ARR, Public Domain and MIT. https://github.com/rtestardi/StickOS2/blob/main/license.txt https://github.com/rtestardi/usbte/blob/master/LICENSE

edit: parent was heavily edited, so this comment makes less sense now.

Public domain is not open source, and especially not free (as in freedom). Restricting commercial use is also not free. At best, this project is partially source-available.

Re: Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

#6

Post by analog31 » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 4:27 PM UTC

turtleyacht wrote: post #4

burgerone wrote: post #3

Edit: Licensing consists of ARR, Public Domain and MIT. https://github.com/rtestardi/StickOS2/blob/main/license.txt https://github.com/rtestardi/usbte/blob/master/LICENSE

All Rights Reserved (ARR)

Also, looks like some parts are patented.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US8117587B1

Re: Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

#7

Post by throawayonthe » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 4:27 PM UTC

bramhaag wrote: post #5

burgerone wrote: post #3

Edit: Licensing consists of ARR, Public Domain and MIT. https://github.com/rtestardi/StickOS2/blob/main/license.txt https://github.com/rtestardi/usbte/blob/master/LICENSE

edit: parent was heavily edited, so this comment makes less sense now. Note that calling this FOSS is completely inaccurate. Some parts are all rights reserved, some are public domain and some are only available for non-commercial use. Public domain is not open source, and especially not free (as in freedom). Restricting commercial use is also not free. At best, this project is partially source-available.

[dead]

Re: Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

#8

Post by burgerone » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 4:31 PM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #6

turtleyacht wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All Rights Reserved (ARR)

Also, looks like some parts are patented. https://patents.google.com/patent/US8117587B1

Correct. What should I replace "FOSS" with so that the title stays short and concise but correctly reflects the licensing/rights situation?

I'm very new to posting on this platform.

Re: Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

#9

Post by patrick451 » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 4:31 PM UTC

bramhaag wrote: post #5

burgerone wrote: post #3

Edit: Licensing consists of ARR, Public Domain and MIT. https://github.com/rtestardi/StickOS2/blob/main/license.txt https://github.com/rtestardi/usbte/blob/master/LICENSE

edit: parent was heavily edited, so this comment makes less sense now. Note that calling this FOSS is completely inaccurate. Some parts are all rights reserved, some are public domain and some are only available for non-commercial use. Public domain is not open source, and especially not free (as in freedom). Restricting commercial use is also not free. At best, this project is partially source-available.

The only thing more frustrating than a rustacaen redefining "safety" to suit their purpose is a Stallman discipline redefining freedom to mean something totally weird. Something in the public domain is not free? Give me a break.

Re: Flea-Scope: $18 Source Available USB Oscilloscope, Logic Analyzer and More [pdf]

#10

Post by fragmede » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 4:34 PM UTC

bramhaag wrote: post #5

burgerone wrote: post #3

Edit: Licensing consists of ARR, Public Domain and MIT. https://github.com/rtestardi/StickOS2/blob/main/license.txt https://github.com/rtestardi/usbte/blob/master/LICENSE

edit: parent was heavily edited, so this comment makes less sense now. Note that calling this FOSS is completely inaccurate. Some parts are all rights reserved, some are public domain and some are only available for non-commercial use. Public domain is not open source, and especially not free (as in freedom). Restricting commercial use is also not free. At best, this project is partially source-available.

> Public domain is not open source, and especially not free (as in freedom).

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) and Open Source Initiative (OSI) recognize public domain software as "free software," but not as open source, but as I understand it, it's not that different from MIT licensed software. Someone can take MIT licensed code, make changes, sell the resulting binary as proprietary code and no one else is allowed to take that binary and sell it as theirs. There are some subtle other differences, but MIT licensing doesn't require other people's changes get contributed back out as open, same as public domain.