Comments on: Can You Patent a Shape? 3D Printing on Collision Course With Intellectual Property Law

By: Natuursteen

Natuursteen — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:45:39 +0000

The penrose triangle is realy cool! But a awnser about patenting a shape in my opinion is no! Things like the penrose triangle would not be populair if it is patented because it would not be used at many places and people just don’t know it exists… That would be a bad thing for such a nice shape like the penrose triangle!

By: evolve

evolve — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:47:26 +0000

3d-printing will almost completely wipe out consumerism. Consumerism will change its emphasis from end-products to raw-materials…

By: custom wheels

custom wheels — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 06:20:12 +0000

I was recommended this web site through my cousin. I am no longer sure whether this put up is written by means of him as nobody else recognize such certain approximately my trouble. You are wonderful! Thank you!

By: Clay Derocco

Clay Derocco — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 05:38:40 +0000

thesubjectand

By: Benefits of Yoga

Benefits of Yoga — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:16:44 +0000

My dad continues to be writing a e-book prec isely on level with th is weblog web site, I’ve emailed him the net deal with so maybe he may choose up a couple pointers. Unbelievable Work.

By: kettlebells

kettlebells — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:36:45 +0000

It’s easily accomplished that you simply libido doing what you attain since your crave authority be noticed in intact your enterprise. Don’t ever let the zeal go on by way of we’re right here at all times anticipating what you take it in aliment whereas us. Thanks since your willingness to receipts your stunning masterpieces.

By: belly fat

belly fat — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 01:09:15 +0000

I’ve read a few good stuff here. Certainly worth bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how much effort you put to make such a great informative web site.

By: louboutin pigalle

louboutin pigalle — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:00:56 +0000

Though I don’t agree with you in details, your post is insightful

By: Jotaf

Jotaf — Sat, 09 Apr 2011 16:31:23 +0000

I think that business models that rely on restricting information flow will eventually have to stop one day; unless it’s a piece of information that the company doesn’t distribute and so can hide it, like the Coca-Cola formula.

I guess music and CAD designs will be kinda like software — “professional” products coexist with a very sizable community of people who do it just for fun (open-source). Ideas will be the domain/creation of the public and state-sponsored endeavors (like academic research), and companies will just be in charge of production and doing things that people actually pay for.

By: Womprat

Womprat — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 23:49:13 +0000

People have been making their own replacement parts for all manner of products and machines for a long long time.

Not a lawyer myself but there would be no legal precedent for a company to argue a patent or copyright was invalidated if an indivdual repaired something they owned by making their own replacement by 3D printer. It would be hard to argue too. 3D printer is just easier than a lathe, casting, existing milling techniques and not substanially different.

It gets interesting if you start handing out the plans, but bare in mind anyone can access patents and indeed study the actual part. Things going to get messy when money changes hands.

By: N W Barcus

N W Barcus — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 20:52:53 +0000

“Every Movie and Song created is out there being traded freely by even the most casual internet user.”

I don’t think that’s at all true. And it’s especially not true if the song is by One Soul Thrust.

By: Astrida V

Astrida V — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 19:39:53 +0000

I think the whole revolution in 3D printing should force some new discussions in copyright and patent law. Patents are too expensive for the average individual to file, and while copyright law offers some protection to an inventor its usually not enough to stop infringement.

We need a mini-patent, something cheaper to file, so that designs can be protected better.

At the same time this article also seems to point to another problem. What if people are inventing the same idea at about the same time in different places. The Penrose Triangle might be such an item, as people have known of it as a puzzle for some time, and the first sculptural model was created in 1934.

By: Ignatyus

Ignatyus — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:59:51 +0000

I was about to write an article about how 3D printing will be changing the “other products” market in much the same way as the Music industry and, currently, the publishing industry, have been forced to change. Nice links in here, I like.

By: Joey Joe Joe Shabadoo

Joey Joe Joe Shabadoo — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:35:30 +0000

Ok, so they did lose the body cases. But the headstock certainly was won.

By: WiKKiDWidgets

WiKKiDWidgets — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:31:31 +0000

In ten years 3D printing technology will be able to print a new Carburetor for your car or a new Human hand. There will bit Bit torrents out there being Shared for copies of the newest Smart phone and the newest gaming system. (XBOX 2030 512bit with 4.7 million GPUs!!) Although I do see a major concern for intellectual property. It isn’t much different than the issue we already have today. China routinely ships billions of dollars of fake goods all over the world every day. Every Movie and Song created is out there being traded freely by even the most casual internet user. Every effort by corporations to protect there I.P. is being thwarted by the court systems in varying countries. I love 3D printing myself, but I design my own things. I’m personally torn both way on the subject. I do not condone stealing, but I also do not condone corporate patents limiting ideas and innovation. I fully intend to have a 3D printer on my computer desk within the next year or so.

By: Amos Zeeberg (Discover Web Editor)

Amos Zeeberg (Discover Web Editor) — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:47:59 +0000

Interesting point, Joey, but it looks to me like the courts have rejected Fender's copyright claim over the design of their guitars, saying the Fender design is pretty generic. But as MusicRadar points out, their designs might be generic because people have been copying them for decades; I'm not a guitar-design conoisseur and can't speak to that point. Even if that is the case, I think Fender might be out of luck---the law demands that copyright holders vigorously defend their rights from the get-go. More importantly, that's the worst name I ever heard.

By: Joey Joe Joe Shabadoo

Joey Joe Joe Shabadoo — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:17:26 +0000

Fender has exclusive intellectual property rights to the shape of guitar headstocks and bodies, and this has been enforced not only in the US but in other countries, such as Japan.