Plaintext
Open Source for Hardware?
Jeremy Bennett, CEO, Embecosm
Open source is well established as a business model in the software world. Red Hat is now
approaching the market capitalization of Sun Microsystems, while IBM, the worlds largest
patent holder, makes more money from open source than other software (source: BBC Radio
4 “In Business”). Major tools such as the Firefox web browser, the Apache web server and
the Eclipse IDE are all open source.
But open source is more than just a business model. It is a change to the underlying
approach to business. Open source software is “free” in the sense of “freedom”—as a
customer you have the source code and you are “free” to do with that software as you wish,
just so long as you pass on that freedom to others.
A consequence of that “freedom” is that open source software is usually also free in the
sense of “not paying”. A supplier can, if they choose, charge for their open source
software―but their customers are free to pass on that software for no charge. When Red Hat
started to charge for their Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), CentOS Linux started to
redistribute RHEL free of charge, recompiled with any Red Hat proprietary material
removed.
Open source works as a business model, because the marginal cost of distributing software
is effectively zero. While users will typically pay nothing for the product, they stimulate a
market, within which revenue can be generated. For a web-based application the revenue
may come from traffic based advertising. With a software tool, revenue comes from the 1% of
customers who need services based around the tool. For any area where there is high
volume, the business model is a winner.
As a consequence, open source software development is a service rather than a product
business. Business is more consultative, and revenue grows incrementally as the software
becomes more popular. Fewer dot.com millionaires, but a relatively stable income for the
professional programmer.
Now here's a novel idea. What about open source for hardware? At first sight this seems a
non-starter. Open source relies on the nil marginal cost of software distribution, but
hardware has to be manufactured.
But a modern silicon chip is typically built from silicon “intellectual property” (IP), written in
a hardware description language such as Verilog or VHDL. Fabless design houses may never
produce a chip themselves—one of the largest and best known is ARM in Cambridge, whose
processor IP is built by other companies into one billion chips ever month. That IP costs the
same amount to produce, whether it goes into one chip or one billion.
The marginal revenue from this silicon IP is tiny. It is an urban myth that the company
supplying the cellophane film covering a mobile phone's screen earns more than ARM from
each phone, but the myth contains a grain of truth. ARM, as market leader, makes pennies
from each phone. Smaller players make far less, or even receive just a one off payment. For
them the marginal revenue really is nil.
The other factor is that the cost of any modern hardware is dominated not by the cost of the
chip, but by the cost of the software that will run on that chip. In a modern product, there is
far more value in the software than the hardware, and that software will need regular
updating to keep the product viable.
This gives the recipe for open source hardware to work, at least for silicon IP. A marginal
cost of nil and an associated product (the software services) whose value is pulled through
1
by volume. Give away your silicon IP and software and make your money from servicing the
software.
There is already a considerable amount of open source silicon IP, and hardware design
companies such as ORSoC AB in Sweden and Beyond Semi in Romania who work with such
IP. However a first glimmer of the complete approach can be seen with Google's Android
open source operating system for mobile phones. Google aren't giving away the hardware
(yet), but put Android together with the OpenMoko open source phone and you have the
complete story.
There is a fly in the ointment—the legal position. Open source software relies on licenses
such as the GNU General Public License (GPL) to enforce the “freedom” rules. These in turn
are based on copyright law, which has for a long time been held to apply to software and its
publication. Most open source hardware projects to date have used the GPL or similar
contracts, even though it is explicitly not suitable for hardware use.
Although silicon IP is written in a description language, its results are typically
disseminated through manufacture, not publication. This is governed legally by patent law,
and unlike copyright, patents cost time and money to obtain. There have been some efforts
to write an open source license that would work for hardware, most notably the Tucson
Amateur Packet Radio (TAPR) Open Hardware License, but this is still a long way from the
maturity of the GPL.
I have recently started discussions with the National Microelectronics Institute (NMI), the
trade body for the UK electronics industry, exploring the possibility of a definitive open
hardware license that is robust in English law. We have a candidate first project, developed
in the Cambridge University Computer Lab by Marcelo Pias. The initial goal is to establish
the UK as a location where open source hardware businesses can proceed on a reliable legal
footing, and then in a wider context internationally. If you would like to help, please get in
touch. In particular we'd like an academic lawyer versed in this area of the law to get
involved.
I believe open source hardware will have an important role in the computer industry in the
future, just as open source software has an important role today. I hope my efforts will
contribute to that success.
Dr Jeremy Bennett is Chief Executive of Embecosm Limited. Embecosm
(www.embecosm.com) provides open source services, tools and models to facilitate
embedded software development with complex systems-on-chip. He is an active contributor
to the OpenCores project (www.opencores.org). Contact him at
jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com.
This article was first published in “The Ring”, the journal of the Cambridge University
Computer Laboratory Ring in May 2009.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 UK: England & Wales
License. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/uk/ or
send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California,
94105, USA.
This license means you are free:
• to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
• to make derivative works
under the following conditions:
• Attribution. You must give the original author, Jeremy Bennett, credit;
2
• For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this
work;
• Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder,
Embecosm; and
• Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.
3