Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs)

[Graham Seaman <graham@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk>]

Andy wrote:
> 
> 	    The schematic layout is analogous to the source code, the compiled
>     binary analogous to the physical hardware. At least thats where I was
>     comming from.
>
rms replied: 
> This analogy makes sense conceptually, but it is not useful for
> thinking about copyright issues or licenses.  Copyright law does not
> treat these two situations in analogous ways.  If you want to make
> good decisions about licenses, I implore you to let go of this
> analogy.
> 
I had been working with a different analogy: schematic layout corresponds
to source, gerber file corresponds to binary, physical hardware corresponds
to CD with executable program on it. I feel this analogy is better because
it makes it clear that there are many different equivalents to the binary
(gerber file, FPGA bitstream, ASIC layout file etc) each of which may
involve different legal problems.
Would you agree with this? 

Graham