Originally Posted by k6sti
I was always under the impression that the purpose of GPL was to facilitate making software freely available. What is the intent with regard to Gray-Hoverman antenna designs?
One of the first intentions of Autofils and other early contributors was that, as retirees, they were pursuing a hobby and thus did not have intentions of marketing or patenting the results of the project. They also did not wish to have the fruits of their labours disappear into the vault of a private corporation intent on hoarding the designs by any sort of "intellectual property" means.
The GPLv3 does indeed cover hardware, and none other than Bruce Perens commented on how nice it is to have the Gray Hoverman under its protection. There are other hardware projects out there protected by the GPLv3.
The GPLv3 was chosen over the Creative Commons License, the FDL, and the Open Document License in order to accomodate any home grown electronic designs or custom software that might also find their way into the Gray Hoverman project. It was a very early precaution I took, and Autofils agreed that it was a proper way to go.
Originally Posted by j3d
I have also wondered about the legality of the GPLv3 as applied to the GH
because there is no copyright holder associated with the license.
Copyright was asserted on all images and documents shown on the www.digitalhome.ca/ota/superantenna
site in order to prevent plagiarism or unauthorized modification of them. In this way, as per the instructions on the GPL site, they are protected properly.
I'm satisfied that we've done what was needed to protect contributors while allowing any and all to benefit from the Gray Hoverman.