[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs)

To: Graham Seaman <graham@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs)
From: "Adam 'WeirdArms' Wiggins" <awiggins@cse.unsw.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:41:12 +1100 ( )
cc: rms@gnu.org, hardlicense-discuss@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk
In-Reply-To: <199911021550.KAA12911@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk>
Sender: owner-hardlicense-discuss@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk

> 
> 3) More a question for others on the list than for rms: apart from
> possibly 2) above, I don't believe anyone wanted to constrain use of the
> physical hardware itself rather than use of the schematic etc. Is this
> correct?

	On my part, yes. I assume the same for the others, the issue is
the designs (schemaics, PCB, VHDL, etc.)

	Cheers Adam 

P.S. I finally handed in my thesis, so I've got more freetime now :)

References:
- Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs)
  - From: Graham Seaman <graham@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk>

Prev by Date: patent lawyer's comments
Next by Date: Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs) (fwd)
Prev by thread: Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs)
Next by thread: Re: changes made/thanks (re hardware designs)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread