http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/index This feed shows recent posts in the forum of the nework FairWork.
"The Tricky Business of “Copylefting” Hardware"]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Reto Stauss) Tue, 22 Dec 2009 08:55:07 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.124003 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.124003
Habe mit ihm im Rahmen von Manufaktur in Grüdnung ein Interview gemacht, welches hier nachzulesen ist:

http://manufakturingruendung.ch/de/im_gespraech_carl_von_canstein_ueber_die_gemeinschaftsbasierte_entwicklung_von_kleinwind_anlagen

Wenn wir ihn und die Community gewinnen könnten, dann wäre ein Anfang gemacht. ]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Reto Stauss) Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:22:00 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.117011 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.117011
Erfolgreich eingesetzt in Griechenland.

Maintainer: Wolfgang Fürst.

Ich werde ihn hierher einladen!]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Franz Nahrada) Sun, 29 Nov 2009 21:09:41 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.116586 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.116586
I have a new suggestion beside Reprap (which I believe is a good product to start), may be the 2nd or 3rd product:
The production and distribution of African clothes and fashion in Europe.
Why?
1. African clothes and fashion is a trend all over the world.
2. Small companies, employers in African countries can gain from this trend.
3. There are market opportunities in the Western world.
4. Enforces cooperation between developing and progressive countries
5. Its not high-tech like Reprap and therefore a totally different product and there i a broad area of customers (not only "nerds").

Alex]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Alex Abramidis) Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:34:15 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.112937 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.112937
Ich denke der Reprap ist ohnehin so eine Art "advanced" Lego-Techniik ....

vg
Alex
]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Alex Abramidis) Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:21:31 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.112935 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.112935
mir kam heut in den Sinn, Spielzeug dh. Bausteine. Bin grad Lego-technik "wiedereinsteiger" :)
Aber ob das so der Brenner sein kann?

florian]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Florian Konnertz) Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:59:00 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.111817 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.111817 http://sakaiproject.org
could be of interest to us]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Alex Abramidis) Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:19:30 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.109959 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.109959 Wenn es für München mehr als nur mich als Interessent gibt, würde ich das gerne für München organisieren.]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Alex Abramidis) Mon, 09 Nov 2009 10:48:11 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.107841 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.107841
I totally agree with both of you.

But we have also face the actual situation and the power behind big commercial and legal organizations. I recommend to watch the film "Dutti der Riese" http://www.artfilm.ch/duttiderriese.php (I can send you the DVD if you would like). It shows how big companies, tried to destroy the co-operative society "MIGROS".

So my proposal would be a extension of the Creative Common License. Of course CC is only meant for digital content, but I think it goes in the right directions.

It would be something like a extension to the Non Commercial (See: http://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/nc.png ) part of the CC.

It would guaranty the right to share and remix designs but not to use it for commercial reasons outside of a FairWare Agreement developed by the Fairwork-Foundation.

Look at my proposal here:

http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/images/image.116861#image
(you have to be logged in to see the picture)

I am sure we could motivate more designer to publish there designs under such a license, rather then under a total open circumstances. If I would be for example a designer of furniture, I would like to open my work under this FairWare CC License and to see how a lot of small manufactures would produce it under fair conditions. But I would not be amused to see my design in Wallmarkt or Ikea, produced in a sweatshop in Vietnam or even a prison in Mexico.






In my opinion we have a great chance to break the power of traditional multinational groups being TRANSPARENT and FAIR, which is "innovative" (new paradigma) and opposite current market situation.

I believe the more transparent we are the more we will gain fully trust at customer, producer, designer, etc. which will result in more "business" and market share. More, complete transparency provide us most powerful "partner" in Web2.0 age, which is media (journalists and community people)! ]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Volker Pohlüke) Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:59:22 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.103775 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.103775
I think there is a flaw on the title page and the description of the fairwork concept. We had again discussions on it yesterday at our Vienna meeating. I think the Fairwork Foundation should herald the principle that knowledge cant be owned . And anything that is a description of a material thing, like the design etc. is in this sense knowledge. It should be Open Source, period. Open Innovation is not enough, its like a more subtle form of exploiting mass creativity, social productiion, private gain. If there is a license at all, it has to protect the Open Source spirit. If its a Creative Commons Share alike license or a FairWare license still has to be determined.

Rather than intellectual property, we have different possibilities to protect the production system and to ensure the benefit of fair trade.

*) create a brand that people consider theirs - and protect that brand against fraud.
*) track products from the beginning to the end.
*) market the benefits of the foundation.

Please help in carving that point out!

see also: http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=1187



I agree completely!

TRANSPARENY and FAIRNESS should be strong assets of such brand image. It will be stronger, the more our business model allows all members to live it! Therefore, complete structure and organization should be fully in line with TRANSPARENCY and FAIRNESS !

]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Volker Pohlüke) Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:42:52 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.103767 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.103767
Currently there is no other way than using patents/closed source or open source everything. Or we invest lots of energy in developing a third way.


We have to differentiate between Patents (Protection of (technical) Innovation) and Copyright (protection of designs and Competition Protection Act (protection of trademarks and from camouflage of customers)

From my opinion today patent laws are going in a wrong direction. See for example posted through Franz yesterday: http://www.foodfreedomnetwork.com/2009/10/monsanto-files-patent-for-new-invention.html

If it makes any sens to us patents is f a really open question or my, which we have to solve pragmatically. In most cases it will not make sens yet because of our limited resources. political resistance against hyperbolical use of parents is maybe more productive.

Copyright is still very much a protection of Prior Art and we can easily protect designs with a upgraded Creative Common License. For my this has maybe more a psychological impact. If somebody will harm this protection, it is also a question of resources if we can do something against it on a legal base. But on a ethical and psychological base it would be good to have that kind of License.

]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Thomas Diener) Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:44:37 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102708 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102708 TOWARD OPEN SOURCE HARDWARE (PDF).

Or have a look at the draft of the TAPR Open Hardware License.

Currently there is no other way than using patents/closed source or open source everything. Or we invest lots of energy in developping a third way.]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Reto Stauss) Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:16:35 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102634 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102634
Of course it sounds compelling to have a license which says "must be produced fair". If such a passage is legal and can enforce this why not create such a license?


I am sure, that we can find a legal way to to formulate such a license and than we can let it open to the designer. It is not posible to deside before there are opportunities for a decision. ]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Thomas Diener) Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:41:39 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102611 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102611
But we have also face the actual situation and the power behind big commercial and legal organizations. It shows how big companies, tried to destroy the co-operative society "MIGROS".


Open Source means Decentralisation means less vulnurability.


I am sure we could motivate more designer to publish there designs under such a license, rather then under a total open circumstances. If I would be for example a designer of furniture, I would like to open my work under this FairWare CC License and to see how a lot of small manufactures would produce it under fair conditions. But I would not be amused to see my design in Wallmarkt or Ikea, produced in a sweatshop in Vietnam or even a prison in Mexico.


Why not leave this decision to the designer? Already lots of people do publish designs under cc or other open source licenses.

Of course it sounds compelling to have a license which says "must be produced fair". If such a passage is legal and can enforce this why not create such a license?]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Reto Stauss) Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:30:34 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102604 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102604
But we have also face the actual situation and the power behind big commercial and legal organizations. I recommend to watch the film "Dutti der Riese" http://www.artfilm.ch/duttiderriese.php (I can send you the DVD if you would like). It shows how big companies, tried to destroy the co-operative society "MIGROS".

So my proposal would be a extension of the Creative Common License. Of course CC is only meant for digital content, but I think it goes in the right directions.

It would be something like a extension to the Non Commercial (See: http://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/nc.png ) part of the CC.

It would guaranty the right to share and remix designs but not to use it for commercial reasons outside of a FairWare Agreement developed by the Fairwork-Foundation.

Look at my proposal here:

http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/images/image.116861#image
(you have to be logged in to see the picture)

I am sure we could motivate more designer to publish there designs under such a license, rather then under a total open circumstances. If I would be for example a designer of furniture, I would like to open my work under this FairWare CC License and to see how a lot of small manufactures would produce it under fair conditions. But I would not be amused to see my design in Wallmarkt or Ikea, produced in a sweatshop in Vietnam or even a prison in Mexico.


]]> no-reply@mixxt.net (Thomas Diener) Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:21:47 +0100 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102573 http://fairwork.mixxt.org/networks/forum/loadpost.102573