At first I had a look at the MIT license model. This is a license that is more used in the software developments and for that reason does not match totally to all the property created during this assignments.
Copyright 2017 Florian Paproth Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
It is a nice license where you can quickly declare work you've done under a license where others can benefit of your code without much limitations but because of its focus on software I used one type of the Creative Commons License.
Because of the more likely software aspect of the MIT license I had a look at the Creative Commons license.
The Creative Commons is a collection of multiple kinds of licenses. It depends on what license modules are taken in the license you choose.
|The name of the license owner has to be mentioned|
|The licensed item is not allowed to be commercial used|
|The item is not allowed to be changed|
|After altering the item the product has to be licensed under the same license|
I used open source software all the time and I am a big fan about the idea of sharing software for creative usage. There should be a difference of someone using software to fulfill project plans for educational and personal use and someone trying to make money out of it. This is where the creative commons license comes in handy.
Read the whole content about the License Creative Commons website
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License by Florian Paproth. Others can use all my work and copy it when they want to. Only condition: they have to tell my name in the credits, their work is also under Cc-License, it their work is not commercial. Big companies has to often misused open-source-software and made billions with it, without paying a single buck to the developer behind the work.
In the future I see possibilities to push the project forward to a state where it could be more than a open source thing. I can imagine to include the progress I made with this project into a currently running other project I am working on that also deals with dog health and control. This project could be a starting point for pitch for a crowd funding campaign or a research project.
At least I will push the project forward to a state where it can be used to help disabled animals and maybe produce an improved solution of this harness for people interested in it. This is where the idea started when I was projects for animals who loses a leg an projects that try to help those who need it. I also want to go in that direction and want animals who could need such a haptic feedback harness to be able to become one.