kmichaels

This case isn't about libraries/templates. If it were I think it would be a clearer copyright violation.

I think they likely just look at the sub-contracting costs and see that the Chinese contractors are massively cheaper then don't ask too many questions.

It's pretty much business as usual to pirate CAD software in China so they probably knew what was happening though.

Right, but usually the licensing around libraries/templates is quite clear? At least it should be.

Here's specifically what they're claiming copyright over:

"DDC’s counsel answered that DDC is focused on expressive content that is not in the actual design of the component, such as the font or the colors used, the shape of a comment box, or the placement of certain components around the design which appear in the design file, but which are not the design itself."

Which seems very weak. Clearly they really would want to go after the Chinese sub-contractor but know this is too hard.

Only way round this I can see is new legislation that means you can be held responsible for copyright violations of sub-contractor if you can reasonably expected to know they are violating copyright.

Going after copyright on the output files is daft and dangerous.

Summary for this work in layman terms:

https://www.osti.gov/accomplishments/anderson.html

The positive electron (positron) appears to have been the first anti-particle identified.

So fundamentally what the author is saying is that this laptop is bad is a way that it was never meant to be good. And that's what makes the title click bait because the author is clearly aware of this.

Clearly it was never meant to be as good as a MacBook Pro.

It was meant to be good as an open source laptop (which it is, as one of the few open laptop designs that exists).

I think, these are just argument why this isn't a good fit for you.

However it's not really a good argument that this is a bad thing in every use case. Calling this a "bad" laptop when the only other laptop that's open to this degree that I'm aware of is bunnie's novena seems a bit silly.

Building on an established design is going to be far easier than bringing up a new PCB. I'd estimate you could get prototypes of this board (6 layer) made for <<1000USD.

If I needed embedded compute, for an instrument I was designing for low volume manufacture I'd consider these boards. If nothing else, I could probably get them fabbed myself if necessary/desirable.

I can see many use cases like this. As well as the fact that some users just philosophically prefer computers whose design is as open as possible.

Just started re-reading the Baroque cycle and plan to follow with Cryptonomicon. Re-reading really reveals a lot that was a bit of a mystery the first time.

None of the options you suggest have an open PCB layout/schematic (which this does in Kicad).

Not only is this philosophically "good" it also has practical benefits if you are looking to build on the design to say, integrate an fpga.

It's interesting though, I think India is becoming more economically competitive as prices rise in China.

Obviously nuts, but quite interesting in that it appears the content has been reused since 2015:

http://www.lovingenergies.net/pt/WIKILEAKS-DOCUMENTS-REVEAL-...

I wonder how this blog network works, how well it pays.

China is getting more expensive and starting to lose jobs to Indian manufacturing though.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. I can imagine manufacturing in India has a lot of advantages.

The thesis here is essentially that they also got regulated out of exsistance. Seen has centers of criminal activity, local government started mandating the removal of inbound calling capability and reduced the number of permits they granted for pay phone installation.

I'm not sure I totally buy this. How much money did pay phones ever make from telecoms companies, given the degree to which they got vandalized and required regular repair anyway.

I think it's the API limit. Last time I tried doing something like this I hit the 250 posts limit.