bagman67
Epic Member
- Messages
- 9,111
I think this may be a collision of one mindset with another, and the request the OP makes here would be reasonable in one context, while many of us see it as unreasonable or even uncouth to frame the request here.
In the opensource and maker community, it's good manners to share your design files and to build on stuff others share and then reinject it back into the community. Indeed, it's bad manners to NOT participate that way. But as a general proposition, the manufacturers participating are small scale operators, or hobbyists, and are - in many cases, but by no means all - just in it for the love of the undertaking, rather than primarily for profit. NB: A somewhat different dynamic characterizes software development, but some issues of sharing vs. proprietary development inhabit that world as well.
But for a larger, strictly for-profit entity, and perhaps more particularly one that deals in parts rather than finished instruments, the design files for those parts are at the heart of the product. Warmoth is not an open-source participant for the goods it manufactures (except to the extent it conforms to specifications promulgated by Fender for certain products, which is not exactly open-source but is instead a de facto standard), and as such Warmoth does not rely for its success on the cross-pollination that the open-source world thrives on. It competes with other larger, mature entities (Allparts, WD, Mighty Mite, etc.) as well as new entrants for whom the barriers to entry are not really substantial. So Warmoth, by releasing its design files, would essentially be subsidizing the development costs of its new-entrant competitors and possibly rendering unearned competitive insight to its mature market adversaries.
For those of us who don't build our own parts from raw materials, and instead depend on Warmoth and other manufacturers, it is important that an ecosystem of healthy competitors in the field exist so we can reliably and consistently get what we want when we need a part. As a member of the buy-not-build crowd, I'm okay with the top shelf supplier I prefer keeping its secrets.
I don't reckon the OP is looking to go into business in direct competition with Warmoth, but even if he is only an end-user, every part he builds himself is a lost sale opportunity for other players in the market. It is unreasonable to expect a manufacturer to facilitate a lost sale.
And to the OP: Describing the response of folks who are loyal customers as "bootlicking" is not a good way to ensure calm, rational dialog, so please consider being a little less judgmental while you remedy gaps in your knowledge.
Sorry if this is meandering, and I know my sentence structure is in places abominable. Y'all be decent to each other.
In the opensource and maker community, it's good manners to share your design files and to build on stuff others share and then reinject it back into the community. Indeed, it's bad manners to NOT participate that way. But as a general proposition, the manufacturers participating are small scale operators, or hobbyists, and are - in many cases, but by no means all - just in it for the love of the undertaking, rather than primarily for profit. NB: A somewhat different dynamic characterizes software development, but some issues of sharing vs. proprietary development inhabit that world as well.
But for a larger, strictly for-profit entity, and perhaps more particularly one that deals in parts rather than finished instruments, the design files for those parts are at the heart of the product. Warmoth is not an open-source participant for the goods it manufactures (except to the extent it conforms to specifications promulgated by Fender for certain products, which is not exactly open-source but is instead a de facto standard), and as such Warmoth does not rely for its success on the cross-pollination that the open-source world thrives on. It competes with other larger, mature entities (Allparts, WD, Mighty Mite, etc.) as well as new entrants for whom the barriers to entry are not really substantial. So Warmoth, by releasing its design files, would essentially be subsidizing the development costs of its new-entrant competitors and possibly rendering unearned competitive insight to its mature market adversaries.
For those of us who don't build our own parts from raw materials, and instead depend on Warmoth and other manufacturers, it is important that an ecosystem of healthy competitors in the field exist so we can reliably and consistently get what we want when we need a part. As a member of the buy-not-build crowd, I'm okay with the top shelf supplier I prefer keeping its secrets.
I don't reckon the OP is looking to go into business in direct competition with Warmoth, but even if he is only an end-user, every part he builds himself is a lost sale opportunity for other players in the market. It is unreasonable to expect a manufacturer to facilitate a lost sale.
And to the OP: Describing the response of folks who are loyal customers as "bootlicking" is not a good way to ensure calm, rational dialog, so please consider being a little less judgmental while you remedy gaps in your knowledge.
Sorry if this is meandering, and I know my sentence structure is in places abominable. Y'all be decent to each other.
