The Fab Charter

[carol]

Under great discussion at Fab6, was The Fab Charter. I have created a page on the wiki for The Fab Charter, and although a discussion could occur there, perhaps it might be better over here in the forum?

Discussion on the charter occurred throughout the week of Fab6, and throughout many different sessions. Haakon led a Fab Foo on this topic during lunch on 20-August, and his summary of the discussion was captured on video. In that summary, Haakon proposes that Fab7 should begin with an introduction and session on The Fab Charter, and that discussions could occur throughout the week, with any changes proposed and decided upon before the end of Fab7.

Since that may be an extensive discussion, and since others may be interested in contributing beforehand, it seems like it might make sense to start a Special Interest Group on this forum about the topic. Perhaps any conclusions and ideas that come from this can then be brought to Fab7, as well?

In any case, it seems like the best place to begin is by posting the charter (so that you don't have to click around to all of the above links... though you certainly may, if you'd like). So... here it is:

The Fab Charter

Mission: fab labs are a global network of local labs, enabling invention by providing access for individuals to tools for digital fabrication.

Access: you can use the fab lab to make almost anything (that doesn't hurt anyone); you must learn to do it yourself, and you must share use of the lab with other uses and users.

Education: training in the fab lab is based on doing projects and learning from peers; you're expected to contribute to documentation and instruction.

Responsibility: you're responsible for:

• safety: knowing how to work without hurting people or machines.
• cleaning up: leaving the lab cleaner than you found it.
• operations: assisting with maintaining, repairing, and reporting on tools, supplies, and incidents.

Secrecy: designs and processes developed in fab labs must remain available for individual use although intellectual property can be protected however you choose.

Business: commercial activities can be incubated in fab labs but they must not conflict with open access, they should grow beyond rather than within the lab, and they are expected to benefit the inventors, labs, and networks that contribute to their success.


draft: August 30, 2007

[karstenj]

hi carol,

like to join the discussion about the fab charter.
i am interested in different aspects.
for example the subject about business / open access.

what is the interpretation of these terms?

in our lab in bremen (under construction), i like to cooperate with cultural institutions, universities, sme, industry, education-institutions...
i like to open the fablab for them, to generate interdisciplinary workshops with us. our fablab should be a platform for collaborative work (for example for education-programs).

the mentioned workshops should connect different groups to and should bring our fablab sponsors (for example from the industry).

i think "commercial" in this case does not mean making big money or profit, but giving the labs sustainability to survive later on.

and the meaning of "open access" in this case includes connecting different disciplines and cultures. for me driving a fablab means cultural management.

further on the lab of course should be open for public and individual use with free entrance.

maybe at fab6 there were missunderstandings about these terms?

karsten

[trox]

I feel that the discussion around the "business" paragraph during Fab6 got distorted by some -- in my view -- rather extremely put interpretations of terms in this item.

Particularly the term "open access" allows for a wide range of interpretations.

I'd like to refer to and discuss "open access" in the context of prior uses of the term, particularly in academia. "Open access" is understood as "free and unlimited online availability" of academic publications (Budapest Open Access Initiative, http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml).

This means that the (final) results of academic work, publications, need to be freely and unlimited available.

Let me briefly discuss the aspect of "unlimited" here. While in the case of publications we're talking about digital copies, it is easy to require unlimited access, since digital copies are themselves unlimited (i.e. scarce) digital copying is possible at near-zero cost. In the case of a Fab Lab, we are dealing with access to physical facilities which are scarce by their nature. So to require unlimited access would be a claim that never could be fulfilled.

The authors of the charter have carefully enough taken this into account, stating that commercial activities (understood as opposed to open access) "must not conflict" with open access (more about conflict later). By specifying that commercial activities "should grow beyond rather than within the lab" the authors at least imply, that it is OK to have (or seed) commercial activities within the lab, as long as their growth does not conflict with open access. Specifically, commercial activities "are expected to benefit the inventors". This is another indication that they are actually welcome within the lab. In fact, inventors are named first in the list of those who benefit from commercial activities. Again, that implies that commercial activities are welcome within the lab.

Additionally, in the "access" item, the authors of the charter require users to "share use of the lab with other uses and users." Note that they explicitly require sharing with other "uses", i.e. other types of use than the original "make almost anything". This is an important statement, because we can infer from that statement, that the authors of the charter have not intended "open access" to mean up to the full capacity of the lab.

Regarding the aspect of "unlimited" from the academic "open access" definition, I feel it is safe to conclude from the wording of the charter, that its authors have not intended to understand "open access" to a Fab Lab to be "unlimited" and not "up to the full capacity of the lab".

Turning to the "free" aspect of the academic definition, we need to understand what free means. In the academic context, it is safe to assume that free means both "gratis" (at no cost) and "libre" (granting additional usage rights, such as copyright and licensing restrictions) since copyright legislation itself grants the typical academic usage rights (such as citation) through so-calles "exceptions". In the context of access to the lab, the usage restrictions are dealt with in the first item of the charter ("make anything (that doesn't hurt anyone)", the learning and the sharing requirement). This seems a practical operationalisation of the "libre" access to Fab Lab.

There is no explicit requirement in the text of the charter that would translate the "free" aspect of "open access" to "gratis" i.e. at no cost. One can infer from the juxtaposition of "commercial" and "open" that the authors of the charter were thinking of a noticeable differentiation of cost between commercial use and open access use. The mission item lists "providing access", the access item states "you can use the fab lab", but non of them requires that access or use needs to be gratis.

Also from the academic analogy of "open access" it could be inferred that the authors actually had the equation "open = gratis + libre" in mind when using the term. Assuming that for the moment, and acknowledging that still a Fab Lab needs to financially sustain itself, it is clear that there need to be ways to finance gratis access to the lab. In academic "open access" publishing, gratis access is typically paid for by other means, be it public funding (in the case of a University repository), or a publisher's business model (in the case of an Open Access journal). There would be no difference with gratis access to a Fab Lab; the costs of gratis access would need to be covered in some way -- from public funding to sponsorship to volunteering to grants to any other possible construction.

Note, also, that the charter even explicitly states that, commercial activities "are expected to benefit (...) labs, and networks that contribute to their success."

In conclusion, I would read the charter as:
-- open access means libre (granting usage rights as specified under "access") and gratis (at no cost)
-- open access is not understood to be unlimited and not "up to the full capacity of the lab"
-- non-open use of the lab is in no way explicitly excluded, rather the charter explicitly allows for "commercial use" which is understood to be the opposite of open access

Finally, there are two points where the charter could be more explicit:
(a) defining "open access" as libre and gratis
(b) being more explicit that "open access" does not mean "up to the full capacity of the lab"
However, these two points are implicitly made in the charter as it stands.

(Post Scriptum: looking at my lengthy deliberation, I feel it's no wonder discussions at Fab6 were at least confused.)

[carol]

Hi Karsten & Peter,

Glad you both joined the discussion. And thanks, Karsten, for mentioning it over on Yammer.

Did either of you participate in the afternoon session on 16-Aug, where Klaas and Lass discussed the NL Fab Foundation? Part of this discussion also revolved around "What is a Fab Lab?" or, rather, "What is it that differentiates a Fab Lab from a [typical] digital fabrication laboratory?"

I think that some of the information in Lass's PowerPoint could help bring light to least a couple of the questions that continue to arise re Fab Charter. I'm wondering if Lass posted that PPT anywhere online -- Do either of you know? If I recall correctly, that was also the first session where the Fab Charter became a discussion point.

I'll ping Lass early this coming week and ask if we can get access to that PowerPoint. It may contribute a little something to this discussion.

Peter, I've basically understood the charter as you describe it in your conclusion, above; although, that interpretation/understanding doesn't seem clear to everyone. I wonder who else -- reading this forum, at least -- shares this understanding of the charter, and who does not? If there are some who do not, where is it that they differ, and why? I wonder if that would help target the other areas of the charter -- in addition to what you note -- that could use some further clarification?

And then, I wonder, how much does one revise and clarify the charter? How much clarification belongs in something more like a license agreement? Speaking of which... do you know where Lass & or Klaas posted the NL Fab Foundation license agreement for attendees of Fab6? I think it helped provide further understanding during the afternoon session on the 16th.

-Carol.

[trox]

Carol ... I participated partly in the session and I do have ... somewhere ... an (old?) copy of the NL agreement ... which I would attach if I could ... but file limits don't allow (its only a 45k pdf ...)

[trox]

This is the Google-translated text of the dutch version I've found on my harddisk -- quickly corrected for the worst damages:

Dutch to English translation


License for use of the trademark FabLab
1 Definition parties
This agreement is by 1) FabLab.nl Foundation, as licensor 2) Party X, hereinafter licentsee
Preamble 2
2.1 Licensor owns, manages, promotes and monitors the brand FabLab the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. This brand is the concept associated FabLab 2.2Het FabLab-concept as content that
2.2.1.Licensee FabLab to tolerate if the location / workshop a significant part of the time open to the general public free of access charges
2.2.2. In existing machines by the Licensee Any visitor can be used independently, such as the control via simple or widely available software takes place.
2.2.3. The Licensee the FabCharter onderschhjft and in practical terms. The online version is, a current copy is attached.
2.2.4. The Licensee open to cooperation with other Dutch FabLabs and sees himself as an active member of the international network of FabLabs.
3 At the brand-related obligations
Licensor and Licensee agree that:
3.1 Licensee may carry the brand FabLab
3.2 Licensee the concept mentioned in 2.2. ultvoert
3.3 Licensor fully associated with the brand licensee to provide facilities such 3.3.1.het van@fablab.nl use e-mail addresses
3.3.2.toegang to publish and reference fablab.nl fablab.nl licensee to
3.3 .3. intermediation in contact with other licensees to the other devices
3.3.4.toegang licensor for licensees 3.4Licentienemer available to meet the licensing of EUR 1, - per year
3.5 Licensee the FabLab visible logo used in both its location / workshop and in its communications, online and otherwise
3.6 Licensee on its website refers to FabLab.nl
3.7 Licensee FabLab may carry the brand name as registered in the state that the statutory concept FabLab 2.2. ultgevoerd is, at the discretion of Licensor
3.8 Licensor no responsibility and no liability for the activities of the licensee, even though those activities the licensed brand.
4 Extension and Termination of License
4.1 The license is valid for every one calendar year from January 1 to December 31
4.2 Thie license is automatically renewed annually unless the licensor or licensee timely written license shall terminate
4.3 Termination latest three months before the end of the calendar year, expiring on on 30 September.
4.4 Termination done with reason.
4.5 Bij termination of licensor to licensee with a license suspended 6 months, if extended licensee undertakes to meet the reasons for
termination
4.6 If licensee has FabLab brand in its own registered name license expires at the amendment of a licensee, in the opinion of Licensor therefore no longer met 3.7.
4.7 If licensee has brand FabLab in its own registered name must himself licensee to amend the statutory name for termination of the license
4.8 Bij termination of the license is licensee requires the use of the mark FabLab set forth in 3.1 and 3.5 immediately cease
5 Escalation
5.1 In disputes about the content and implementation of this licensing agreement brought licensor and licensee himself in good order to mutually agree 5.20p this license agreement is governed by Dutch law
6 Final provision
By signing the license agreement after 1 September of the current calendar, this license agreement for the subsequent calendar year.
Date: Place:
FabLab.nl Foundation,
...
Party X
...

[jmanton]

Carol ... I participated partly in the session and I do have ... somewhere ... an (old?) copy of the NL agreement ... which I would attach if I could ... but file limits don't allow (its only a 45k pdf ...)

That's been upped to 1M now. The default values for attachments in this software are very small.

Jonathan

[carol]

Peter,

Thank you!

[Breed77]

Nice thread. I really enjoy reading this. Thanks for sharing!