Patent protection system introduced for 3d printers. we need a new thingiverse fast!!!!!

BBC news report

Paving the way for pay per download of designs.
We really need a good thingiverse alternative.
Any good solid community run ones surfaced yet??

---

__________________________________________

I'm newly registered on this forum but I have been following/reading up on/researching 3d printing for 3 years or so.
My Reprappro mendel should be in my hands by the 19/10/12

Maybe I'm missing this, but what exactly is the connection the Thingiverse?

I'm surprised that the patent could be accepted, outside the blatantly obvious nature of the patent, I'd be stunned if there wasn't a broader existing patent that just covered wrapping a file in a container and having some rights management on the container.
Either way someone would have to make a conscious decision to actually employ the DRM, everything on thingiverse is either Creative Commons or GPL, so has no need for the container.

There are going to be pay for model sites, they already exist.
If people feel they can add enough value to charge for something they will, I think expecting everything to be "free" is a bit naive.

sorry i didn't explain my thoughts correctly. I've said before that thingiverse will start charging sooner or later.
To me this is the first step(not saying that thingiverse got the ball rolling on this though)

Just want to see a community run site for things. Leaving it in the hands of a company that is now really just in it for the money is dangerous for the community. sooner or later we will have to pay to be a member or will have to pay to upload with gold/silver/bronze style memberships

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2012 05:12PM by keithCl.

Sucks to be Makerbot right now.

They're just hoarding things and demanding money for it. Where are they gonna get these files to patent protect? How are they going to convince the producers of Slic3r and Skeinforge to implement patent checking tech? Who cares? Plenty of people at ThePirateBay will help if it becomes an issue.

Makerbot is just digging a deeper hole with this.

inb4 "The end is nigh!"

---

-Tom

What on earth does that article have to do with Makerbot?

thingiverse did not apply for this patent. it was Intellectual Ventures
I only brought their name into it because I can see them using this kind of system in the future.
If there is a community run thing site then we won't have to worry about patents being a problem.

after a quick bit of research i found this site shiftlabs.com

Turns out Bre CEO of Makerbot and Pablos Holman of Intellectual Ventures are both listed as advisers.
Maybe i'm reading too much into it but could it be possible makerbot approached Intellectual Ventures about this patent?
Makerbot now know better than to associate it's name with patents given the recent controversy....
They obviously have connections with each other.

Again I admit I could be reading too much into this

another link showing the connection between makerbot and Pablos Holman of Intellectual Ventures

Don't jump to conclusions, and if you did, consider why you did it. The reddit sub mentions who submitted the patent.

Putting the Makerbot image there is bad journalism.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2012 06:05PM by Jasper1984.

Makerbot is no longer the Open Source "face" of Reprap. They became strictly a business the second they went CS. In order for a business to survive they need to take some discretion here and there.

BBC News probably wouldnt be using a Makerbot picture in their article without direct consent from Makerbot. This is grounds for a lawsuit.

---

-Tom

sorry jasper1984 but i'm not sure what you mean by this "and if you did, consider why you did it." could you rephrase for me please?

Rubbish it's a stock photo of a 3D printer.

If anything we should be applauding the patent.
Given that the patent is filed by a company that does nothing but sue other companies for violating the patents they have (i.e. a Patent Troll)
All they really did by filing it was make it more expensive for any company that wants to use a system like this.

The Patent is obvious, any company that wants to have a pay for 3D model system that's end to end (including the printer firmware) would consider something similar, I'm sure cubify's system is similar.

yeah that's probably true Polygonhell, but you can sue for anything in the states and sticking a picture like this on an article thats bound to draw a ton of bad PR is (I hope) obviously a bad idea. One would hope their authors/web designers would put in some consideration when sticking a picture next to it of a companies logo with a printer behind it. Yeah the logo is ON the printer, but it's really visible.

Maybe it is just stock photography, maybe not. I'll admit I've been angry with Makerbot lately so maybe this is just me seeing everything as "their fault."

---

-Tom

makerbot and the company that filed the patent(Intellectual Ventures) ARE directly connected.

Pablos Holman works with both companies

see this link

and this link

Pablos is an advisor for makerbot and works for Intellectual Ventures(patent trolls)
bye bye thingiverse......

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2012 07:16PM by keithCl.

I think DRM will happen when 3d printers become another consumer device like an ipod or dvd player and are sold at the local supermarket.
DRM will be wasted on 3d printers since the models are easy enough to reproduce from scratch anyway. so let them have their patent.

Any solid community run thingiverse alternative surfaced yet??

I wonder how you all feel about that 'or' in 3.2 now...

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

www.zatopa.com is what I am working on as a marketplace. It will not be a thingiverse clone but something a little different. Currently I am looking for venders who want to sell their designs, parts, machines and etc. but you must have a min. of 5 ready to go and already being sold. Initially I am only looking for a few solid venders to start but I plan to expand so that anyone can be a vendor and list their designs. If this sounds like something you might be interested in please PM me or sign up on the sight..


This patent is scary but there is a good chance of it being unenforceable due to prior art. On top of that, just how well has DRM worked for.........um.........anything?

You need to have commercial content and piracy before talking about DRM starts making any sense.
This is putting the cart before the horse.

Which is indicative of patent trolls, just like Polygonhell says.

I'm more worried about articles like that provoking yet another avalanche of moronic tabloid "features" on "dangers" of 3d printing and home fabs, home-built weapons and "printing drugs", whatever that means.

Here are two links to show where they are getting the printed drugs idea

chemical printer

chemputer

These things could be done at home well before 3d printers got to this stage.

Tabloids are quite good at getting carried away however it could be possible to print drugs at home.
Also if you wanted to grow weed at home you can. other drugs are also possible to produce at home if you have the right info(readily available from a quick google)
.
Guns are also easily made by anyone with a good metal working shop.

That company is a patent trolling company. They are hoping that someone will try to DRM 3D manufacturing files so they can sue them. It's clear from the fact that an ex-Microsoft technology boss, and that they own 40,000 patents.

Now the problem is if they really are connected to MakerBot in a way that means that MakerBot will start to DRM their 3D files. However, this only becomes an issue if MakerBot becomes like Apple in that they control an entire distribution system. If Thingiverse continues to be the only significant means of sharing design files I can see that happening.

---

Help improve the RepRap wiki! Just click "Edit" in the top-right corner of the page and start typing. Anyone can edit the wiki!

@keitCl: i think people are bit too keen on bashing makerbot. I meant conclusions that come from the BBC article.

Good call noticing Pablos Holman. (repeating others that it doesn't necessarily imply a connection with the patent)

@Jasper1984,@keithCI FYI, I emailed Pablos Holman asking if he is still active in both positions (Makerbot & Intellectual Ventures) and he replied he is.

keithCl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here are two links to show where they are getting
> the printed drugs idea

Yes, but those have nothing to do with 3D printers, FDM and RepRap.
It's the same situation as saying "i saw a 5-axis CNC mill out and turn a gun, gee, that 3D printer looks awfully like a tiny CNC, therefore, people will make guns at home now."

My post was a jab at that kind of reasoning, which seems to be prevalent in news portals, tabloids and un(/mis-)informed blogs.

Just because there's a patent on it does not in any way indicate that Stratasys, 3D Systems, Makerbot, or any other 3D printer manufacturer will actually license that patent. It would be in their interest not to license the patent, as to do so would be a clear indication that they intend to cripple their equipment.

Also, the patent is not specific to additive manufacturing, but also "subtractive manufacturing, extrusion manufacturing, melting manufacturing, solidification manufacturing, ejection manufacturing, die casting, or a stamping process". The only possible use for the patent that I can think of would be so that a designer can send a 'protected model' off to a manufacturer and have, say, only 50 objects machined and delivered back to the designer, and the designer can be assured that the manufacturer isn't making 1000 more unauthorized copies and selling them out the back door.

All of this furor is also overlooking the most major flaw of all - a crack for the DRM would likely show up on the Pirate Bay within hours of release. Every kid with a 3D printer and a debugger would be eager to break the system.

---

[haveblue.org]