The Open Source Hardware Association is taking input on the proposal for an open hardware certification in this forum. This thread is devoted to question # 8, which reads: “Should OSHWA maintain a public database of certification complaints and how those complaints were addressed? If so, should the entire process be public or should there be a grace period for private resolution?” For other question forums, as well as a general comment forum, click [here].
If the mark is not able to be removed from a non-open project which was previously certified, this is one way a penalty could be levied, though it would only be the opening shot over the bow.
Yes. There are too many projects which claim to be open source hardware where the documentation was never provided.
I think OSHWA should maintain a living Frequently Asked Questions or “misunderstanding of the week” but not anything that names names. That’s too much energy wasted on drama.
Yes, ans also track on what happened to those- conclusions.
Maybe “yes”, but only after a full process of “certification abuse”: let say that when a project has been shown as abusing the term of openness for its hardware stuffs, and when a long “chance to change this” has been run, then it may be at the ultimate end, useful to name that this project rejects any of openness requirements and should not be considered as openness.
Again … this could be costly for OSHWA to run and maintain.
But it could be useful to avoid “abuse”.
Yes, but only after investigation determent a public warning or higher punishment is given or open litigation has started.