week 18

Invention, Intellectual Property, and Income

ASSIGNMENTS:

•  Develop a plan for dissemination of your final project.
• Prepare a Summary Slide and a Video Clip

plan for dissemination

license

In this context I have studied the licenses viz. CC, MIT, GPL, LGPL, 2-BSD so on and so forth.

From the MIT license page I got link to two other pages which helped me to understand the licensing system better. One is a wikipedia page another is License differentiator. From here I got to know about the proper difference and the utilities of the licenses.

I had shortlisted between MIT license and Creative Commons 4.0 to go with. Now I will be discussing about the both and why I chose to use Creative Commons.

Licenses can be judged on the basis of the following criteria:

• Linking
• Distribution
• Modification
• Patent Grant
• Private Use
• Sublicensing.

Now, if we discuss MIT Licence and Creative Commons 4.0 based in the mentioned criteria we get the following judgement.

In Terms of Linking, distribution and modification they both are permissive.

In terms of patent grant Creative commons does not have any kind of protection while in MIT license one can have patent grant / claim if applied manually.

In terms of private use and sublicense, CC-BY  and MIT are permissive while CC-BY-SA (share alike) does not allow sub licensing without acknowledging the former.

In trademark, MIT license will allow to apply for trademark manually. while the later is unclear about the trademarking.

creative commons 4.0

The main reason of using Creative commons is its ease of use and flexibility with documentation in lucid language.

• I am using a piece of code in my Grasshopper code written by Ryan Luke Jones of Greyshed which follows Creative Commons CC-BY-SA license. It allows me to modify, remix and use the same code for distribution and personal use given I share alike.

• The creative commons page for the selection of license is very intuitive to look for a license also through simple question answer.

In this case I have chosen a license:

Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

Shortened as CC-BY-SA.

project showcase

Once the robotic arm is built and performing, I would like to showcase in MakerFest 2018 at Ahmedabad. It is a joint venture by MJFF and CEPT University.

utilisation

Robotic arm at a model scale is a very common maker project. I do not intend to make the robotic arm as the product for the business, but teaching robotics in architecture and its implementation in a model scale. Being in FabLab CEPT, I have realised that a Fablab within an architectural school functions different than other labs to certain extent where the idea of prototyping and model making are major concerns.

In computational design and parametric architecture, use of Rhino-Grasshopper is very common. A robotic arm that responds to the geometry and functionalities from Grasshopper will be helpful for people to utilise and understand robotics in architecture in much more intimate scale.

development

I intend to develop a grasshopper component to work with this robot in the next 3 year timeline along with development of the robotic arm itself. Possibly it will be a stepper based arm by then.

possible funding

Initially through Angel investing or Venture Capital investment and further crowd funding.

presentation slide & video

The slide and video named presentation.png and presentation.mp4 respectively are in the root folder presently.