Have open-source hardware licenses ever been enforced when distributing a physical product?
<p>As I have <a href="https://opensource.stackexchange.com/q/8395/2829">found out</a>, there are &quot;open-source hardware&quot; licenses which are written in the spirit of &quot;open-source software&quot; licenses and require the user to publish a modified design if they distribute a physical product based on that design. Examples are TAPR and Arduino license.</p>
<p>However, unlike software which is subject to copyright in any form, circuit boards are not subject to copyright as they are not works of art. This makes me wonder whether open-source hardware licenses can actually provide the protection that they advertise.</p>
<p>Are such licenses deemed legally enforceable? Have they ever been enforced?</p>

<h2>Circuit boards are not subject to copyright but circuit board designs are</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ecbb24af-4a0a-4971-9022-2edfeac253eb" rel="nofollow noreferrer">This</a> case from Taiwan neatly explains the difference.</p>
<p>The licence presumably attaches to the design of the circuit board - the circuit diagram, circuit board layout, or integrated circuit layout. In order to use the design, one would almost surely need to make a copy of it or modify it. It is this step that requires adherence to the licence, not the actual manufacture of the circuit.</p>

licensing open-source-software