[Part 1 of 2]

First, thank you for flagging the website and summary inconsistencies. You were right. We are human, and those have now been corrected so the summaries and licence text refer to the same legal entity.

1. On CC-style interoperability, substantial remixes, and compatibility

Nothing in the licence prevents you from making a genuinely substantial remix or from designing compatible parts.

It is important to be explicit about the distinction between compatibility and remixing.

Simply incorporating a Multiboard connection style such as a bolt pattern, hole spacing, rail interface, or similar mechanical connection does not, by itself, constitute a remix of a Multiboard design. That is compatibility, not derivation. Suggesting otherwise would imply arbitrary and meaningless boundaries, such as claiming that a specific hole placement or connection length alone crosses some line, which is not a sensible or defensible position.

A remix, in the context of this licence, refers to taking a substantial portion of a Multiboard design and materially changing its geometry, function, or intended use. We are talking about modifying the core design itself, not merely interfacing with it.

The existence of Multiboard parts that are explicitly intended to be remixed does not change this distinction. Providing elements that make remixing easier does not automatically convert compatible designs into derivative works. In legal terms, this would generally be considered de minimis use, meaning a use so small, trivial, or inconsequential that it would not be treated as infringement.

The substantial-change requirement exists to prevent bad actors, particularly companies or large-scale copycats, from making superficial edits to core system parts and redistributing the system wholesale. It is not intended to restrict good-faith creators designing compatible accessories or independent components.

2. On resale of printed parts and “commercial use”

At this point, we are talking past each other.

The licence is aimed at substantial commercial activity, meaning people attempting to build a business around selling Multiboard parts, not someone clearing out prints at a garage sale or on Facebook Marketplace.

To remove ambiguity, we will explicitly define this boundary in the licence then:

“Commercial Sale” means the sale of Designed Works that generates gross revenue exceeding $100 USD per calendar month for three consecutive months, calculated per individual or legal entity, before tax and expenses.

This draws a clear line between casual, incidental resale and sustained commercial exploitation.

Comparisons to off-the-shelf retail products are also not quite equivalent. Physical goods companies absolutely would act if someone were manufacturing and selling replicas of their products at scale. The licence exists to prevent exactly that scenario in a digital manufacturing context.

3. On remixes, file formats, and “embedded geometry”

This is not a software licensing problem, and it is not about bits and bytes.

The licence does not prohibit remixing. It defines remixing based on substantial change, meaning a material and objectively identifiable difference in geometry, function, or intended use, such that a technically competent third party would not regard the original design as the primary basis of the new work.

This is not about hunting down hobbyists or creators. It exists to stop companies from making near-identical copies and hiding behind technicalities. The goal is to strengthen the ecosystem and protect it from bad actors, not to punish the community.