理查德·斯托曼阐述了“自由硬件”的概念，强调自由硬件意味着用户可以自由复制和修改设计，而非价格问题。他指出，由于硬件复制的难度，自由硬件的重要性不如自由软件，但对那些热衷于硬件设计的人来说仍是一项有意义的工作。文章讨论了硬件设计的版权、专利问题以及接口规格的开放对于自由软件开发的重要性。
RichardStallman -- On "Free Hardware"
Jun 22, 1999, 04 :27 UTC
By Richard Stallman GNU
A number of people have asked the GNU Project if we would like tobranch out from free software into free hardware designs, andexpressed their interest in working on them. Some people have evensuggested a project to make free chip designs.
To understand this issue clearly, recall that ``free software'' isa matter of freedom, not price; broadly speaking, it means thatusers are free to copy and modify the software. So if we try toapply the same concept to hardware, ``free hardware'' meanshardware that users are free to copy and modify; a ``free hardwaredesign'' means a design that users are free to copy, modify, andconvert into hardware.
Free software is often available for zero price, since it oftencosts you nothing to make your own copy. Thus the tendency toconfuse ``free'' with ``gratis''. For hardware, the differencebetween ``free'' and ``gratis'' is more clear-cut; you can'tdownload hardware through the net, and we don't have automaticcopiers for hardware. (Maybe nanotechnology will provide thatcapability.) So you must expect that making fresh a copy of somehardware will cost you, even if the hardware or design is free. Theparts will cost money, and only a very good friend is likely tomake circuit boards or solder wires and chips for you as afavor.
Because copying hardware is so hard, the question of whether we'reallowed to do it is not vitally important. I see no socialimperative for free hardware designs like the imperative for freesoftware. Freedom to copy software is an important right because itis easy now--any computer user can do it. Freedom to copy hardwareis not as important, because copying hardware is hard to do.Present-day chip and board fabrication technology resembles theprinting press. Copying hardware is as difficult as copying bookswas in the age of the printing press, or more so. So the ethicalissue of copying hardware is more like the ethical issue of copyingbooks 50 years ago, than like the issue of copying softwaretoday.
However, a number of hardware ethusiasts are interested indeveloping free hardware designs, either because they have fundesigning hardware, or because they want to customize. If you wantto work on this, it is a fine thing to do. The GNU volunteercoordinators (gvc@gnu.org) can put you in touch with other peoplewho share this interest. If organizations are formed for thispurpose, the GNU Project will refer interested people tothem.
People often ask about the possibility of using the GNU GPL or someother kind of copyleft for hardware designs.
Firmware such as programs for programmable logic devices ormicrocoded machines are software, and can be copylefted like anyother software. For actual circuits, though, the matter is morecomplex.
Circuits cannot be copylefted because they cannot be copyrighted.Definitions of circuits written in HDL (hardware definitionlanguages) can be copylefted, but the copyleft covers only theexpression of the definition, not the circuit itself. Likewise, adrawing or layout of a circuit can be copylefted, but this onlycovers the drawing or layout, not the circuit itself. What thismeans is that anyone can legally draw the same circuit topology ina different-looking way, or write a different HDL definition whichproduces the same circuit. Thus, the strength of copyleft whenapplied to circuits is limited. However, copylefting HDLdefinitions and printed circuit layouts may do some goodnonetheless.
It is probably not possible to use patents for this purpose either.Patents do not work like copyrights, and they are very expensive toobtain.
Whether or not a hardware device's internal design is free, it isabsolutely vital for its interface specifications to be free. Wecan't write free software to run the hardware without knowing howto operate it. (Selling a piece of hardware, and refusing to tellthe customer how to use it, strikes me as unconscionable.) But thatis another issue.
Copyright 1999 Richard Stallman
Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire article ispermitted provided this notice is preserved.
Jun 22, 1999, 04 :27 UTC
By Richard Stallman GNU
A number of people have asked the GNU Project if we would like tobranch out from free software into free hardware designs, andexpressed their interest in working on them. Some people have evensuggested a project to make free chip designs.
To understand this issue clearly, recall that ``free software'' isa matter of freedom, not price; broadly speaking, it means thatusers are free to copy and modify the software. So if we try toapply the same concept to hardware, ``free hardware'' meanshardware that users are free to copy and modify; a ``free hardwaredesign'' means a design that users are free to copy, modify, andconvert into hardware.
Free software is often available for zero price, since it oftencosts you nothing to make your own copy. Thus the tendency toconfuse ``free'' with ``gratis''. For hardware, the differencebetween ``free'' and ``gratis'' is more clear-cut; you can'tdownload hardware through the net, and we don't have automaticcopiers for hardware. (Maybe nanotechnology will provide thatcapability.) So you must expect that making fresh a copy of somehardware will cost you, even if the hardware or design is free. Theparts will cost money, and only a very good friend is likely tomake circuit boards or solder wires and chips for you as afavor.
Because copying hardware is so hard, the question of whether we'reallowed to do it is not vitally important. I see no socialimperative for free hardware designs like the imperative for freesoftware. Freedom to copy software is an important right because itis easy now--any computer user can do it. Freedom to copy hardwareis not as important, because copying hardware is hard to do.Present-day chip and board fabrication technology resembles theprinting press. Copying hardware is as difficult as copying bookswas in the age of the printing press, or more so. So the ethicalissue of copying hardware is more like the ethical issue of copyingbooks 50 years ago, than like the issue of copying softwaretoday.
However, a number of hardware ethusiasts are interested indeveloping free hardware designs, either because they have fundesigning hardware, or because they want to customize. If you wantto work on this, it is a fine thing to do. The GNU volunteercoordinators (gvc@gnu.org) can put you in touch with other peoplewho share this interest. If organizations are formed for thispurpose, the GNU Project will refer interested people tothem.
People often ask about the possibility of using the GNU GPL or someother kind of copyleft for hardware designs.
Firmware such as programs for programmable logic devices ormicrocoded machines are software, and can be copylefted like anyother software. For actual circuits, though, the matter is morecomplex.
Circuits cannot be copylefted because they cannot be copyrighted.Definitions of circuits written in HDL (hardware definitionlanguages) can be copylefted, but the copyleft covers only theexpression of the definition, not the circuit itself. Likewise, adrawing or layout of a circuit can be copylefted, but this onlycovers the drawing or layout, not the circuit itself. What thismeans is that anyone can legally draw the same circuit topology ina different-looking way, or write a different HDL definition whichproduces the same circuit. Thus, the strength of copyleft whenapplied to circuits is limited. However, copylefting HDLdefinitions and printed circuit layouts may do some goodnonetheless.
It is probably not possible to use patents for this purpose either.Patents do not work like copyrights, and they are very expensive toobtain.
Whether or not a hardware device's internal design is free, it isabsolutely vital for its interface specifications to be free. Wecan't write free software to run the hardware without knowing howto operate it. (Selling a piece of hardware, and refusing to tellthe customer how to use it, strikes me as unconscionable.) But thatis another issue.
Copyright 1999 Richard Stallman
Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire article ispermitted provided this notice is preserved.
扫一扫
886
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
