Important notice if you post items on Thingiverse or similar

Wanted to warn people that a scum bag has been downloading thousands of 3D files along with the photos and then posting prints of them all for sale on ebay.

Most of my items are listed under the non commercial license yet I found (and reported) several he is selling. And he used photos I took to advertise them.

Here is his store [www.ebay.com]

If you find your items there you should contact ebay about the issue, they don't make the info easy to find but the email address is vero@ebay.com to report intellectual property rights violation.

Now, if you posted the item under the "share and share alike" license then he can sell them but he is still not allowed to use your photo to do so, he would have to either print the item and take his own photo or 3D render it.

He currently list over 2,000 3D prints for sale and I am willing to bet than none belong to him.

Did you contact Thingivers, can they do a take down for all of the items from Thingivers?

But then the question in my heat pops up:
Is this so bad?
He makes the products available for a very big group of people that don't own a 3D printer !!!!

With that in my mind I don't know how I would react. I am building my first 3D printer and didn't
post anything yet on Thingivers.

Yes, it's bad. FIrst off I choose the non commercial license on purpose so that I have the option to sell my designs (and I do sell some of them) so if he sold the same designs then he is stealing my profit. Second, he stole my copyrighted photos as well. One of the things I do for a living is sell my photography as stock (used in advertising and such) now of course the photos he stole were not from my stock selection but the same laws apply (photos are covered by not only copyright but intellectual property right laws).

This is just a violation of law and trust. Quite frankly if I thought people would do this, I would never post my work. Now I don't normally make trinkets (shelf stuffers as I call them) but rather most of my designs are useful. If I wanted them sold, I would sell them myself.

Apparently I am not alone as there is a lengthy discussion going on over on Thingiverse by people outraged at his theft of their property.

Thingiverse is aware and they are talking to their lawyers about it but they are not the rights holders. I have sent a DMCA to ebay which is the correct and legal way to get them to take down my items but this will only help those that do the same.

I feel the pain of the people who thought their designs were protected from commercial exploitation, but civil agreements are only worth the amount you're willing to spend on a lawyer to enforce them. Legal mumbo-jumbo aside, the bottom line is that if you intend to commercially exploit your designs/parts, and don't want others to do the same, don't post them on sites like Thingiverse. It's just common sense.

This reminds me of the hot-end designers who occasionally show up here complaining about all the shoddy knock-offs that are spoiling their business and the reputation of their designs. Trying to sell quality parts at quality prices to people who, even if they could recognize quality, aren't willing to pay for quality, is a waste of time and energy.

Take a lesson from the big players- you won't see HP posting detailed designs of their next (or last) inkjet printer on line somewhere. You either keep your designs as a trade secret or you patent them. You don't post them on line for the world to see, even with a CC-NC license.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2016 07:55AM by the_digital_dentist.

---

Ultra MegaMax Dominator 3D printer: [drmrehorst.blogspot.com]

tmorris9 - well done for posting this here to create awareness of this incident. I was going to suggest posting a link to the G+ thread but to save effort i shall do so below.

For everyone else, here is the link to the G+ thread

There is also this article on the situation with further reading linked in

And here is the link to the "sad face" item and comments section on thingiverse which has ongoing responses and further reading. Please pay particular attention to the brazen response of the taker concerned.

Creative commons was created by a collective of scholarly philanthropic legal and entrepreneurial minds to allow free access to information whilst giving protective rights to contributors. I have heard this license commented on in both positive and negative light, but i think the best expression i have heard coveted upon it is "a toothless guard dog" (by Nathan Walkner on the above G+ thread) and at this time I would agree.

Personally I dont post onto thingiverse for a number of reasons that we dont need to go into here, but reasons all related to this prime example of IP theft and CC weakness.

It is great to have the kudos of a community behind you when one posts designs, but the real world exists outside the utopian foundations of CC and there are all to many and common breaches of the licensing terms, of which there is an ongoing debate about the legality or enforceable nature of the CC system. As far as I am aware it has never been tested in the court of law neither have I heard of the system acting to protect its contributors.

This incident is not unusual in that items have been copied and the Non-Commercial aspect of the license has been simply ignored, but it seems on this occassion it has perhaps lit the blue touch paper required to ignite a debate and will hopefully provoke some action and support by the aforementioned creators of this licensing system. If this doesnt, nothing will and Creative Commons in the realm of 3D (and possibly wider world) will have been dealt in my view a significant blow to its credibility.

edit: one thing I will however not understand is given the past actions of the entity behind thingiverse and patenting previously published ideas, and the furore it kicked up, why people continue to upload files and designs to the site given that the actions of said entity are little to no different from what has occured in this instance.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2016 08:37AM by Mutley3D.

It's really horrible to have a design stolen or exploited! It's a shame that there are people out there who do such a thing.

However, it's an issue that is a big one and actually, in my opinion, something that is a barrier to 3D printing becoming truly mainstream. Manufacturing is a significant way of preventing people stealing your ideas so when you take that out of the equation and simply sell the design and let others manufacture your design then you're left with intellectual property rights as a way of enforcing your rights. The major issue is that IP law does not work in such situations where someone has stolen/exploited a design worth only £200 or so because the costs of enforcing the law is so high.

I think the answer at the moment is quite obvious: simply stay away from free sites such as Thingiverse. Once your design is available free to download then nothing (including licences) is going to stop people stealing/exploiting those designs. Therefore it's a really bitter pill to swallow but nothing can be done in hindsight, at the moment it can only be avoided by not publishing any designs.

However, I hope Ebay and Thingiverse provide you with a satisfactory method for retribution. Let us know how it goes.


Cheers,
www.3dexfilament.co.uk - sale now on

So much for the "Knowledge Economy" when people can just take the knowledge from a single picture,
You cant market your product without releasing pictures,
or worse just take the model because they can't be bothered to model it themselves.
Even worse when a friend steals your idea and starts talking about how to market it, like its his own
this happened last week, not the first time either, his justification, "but your just using common parts there's no IP"
I wouldnt have minded as much if he was just thinking of making one for himself, but I could see the dollar signs in his eyes, even though this was over the telephone, I could here the cash register pinging in his brain

I stopped putting models on GrabCad
when you get more downloads than likes, you kinda think what's the point,
& Shapeways, too expensive to use, so why bother adding models to a service I may never use again.

[www.thingiverse.com]
[3dprint.com]

Quote
ebay_seller
“When you uploaded your items onto Thingiverse for mass distribution, you lost all rights to them whatsoever. They entered what is known in the legal world as ‘public domain’. The single exception to public domain rules are ‘original works of art’. No court in the USA has yet ruled a CAD model an original work or art. Therefore, you have no right to exclude others from utilizing the CAD models you have uploaded.

Furthermore, if in the future we do get a precedent in the USA for establishing CAD models as ‘original works of art’, we would still likely be just fine as we are not re-selling your CAD models, but rather ‘transformative’ adaptions [sic] of them in the form of 3D printed objects.

SFE

P.S. When you created these CAD files, did you really want to limit the amount of people who could enjoy them to the 0.01% of the USA with a 3D Printer? 100% of America can purchase the items from us at a reasonable cost and enjoy them-creating made in the USA jobs in the process as well. Furthermore, if you hate the idea of people profiteering from your work, you may want to take it up with Makerbot/Stratasys who only hosts Thingiverse for AD revenue, to sell more 3D printers.”

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2016 05:25AM by Frans@France.

He is absolutely wrong about it becoming public domain. And about you losing your rights. He is a dumb kid fresh out of college that thinks he knows it all but knows nothing.

Quote
tmorris9
He is a dumb kid fresh out of college that thinks he knows it all but knows nothing.

And if I understand correctly even won(!) a prize with this business plan, so some jury also lacks some serious insight.

He appears to be a pure scammer.
He has many listings like this, apparently trying to get people to mistakenly buy at horrendous prices, with no refunds:

now on some news media sites [www.3ders.org]

Thingiverse made an announcement about this here.

and Michael Weinberg posted some interesting discussion on his blog here.

Quote
Paul Wanamaker
He appears to be a pure scammer.
He has many listings like this, apparently trying to get people to mistakenly buy at horrendous prices, with no refunds:

Scammer.JPG

If it were a scam he sure wouldn't show a picture of what your $300+ is going to buy.

---

Ultra MegaMax Dominator 3D printer: [drmrehorst.blogspot.com]

That's one theory, but the explanation he gave for using the designers' photos was that he hasn't made all the items yet and that he would replace the photos after the first order.

I don't think it's a scam as such. I just think it's an unethical business plan if it relies on violating license terms.

Quote
IMBoring25
That's one theory, but the explanation he gave for using the designers' photos was that he hasn't made all the items yet and that he would replace the photos after the first order.

I don't think it's a scam as such. I just think it's an unethical business plan if it relies on violating license terms.

Some of the items listed upon the ebayer store had Non-commercial licences attached to the designs. So by printing them then selling them you are in violation of that licence. Also they haven't linked back to the design upon thingiverse giving credit to the designer, giving attribution [wiki.creativecommons.org]
I would also state that the ebay account is not registered as a business, which ebay should look into as he clearly buying and selling for profit.
It could be regarded as scam if someone buys that item and they don't deliver; None of the protection schemes for ebay and pay-pal payment protection are enabled, so any claim for loss would take a lot longer and cost time and money.
ebay is much like a physical auction house, once you click that buy button you enter into a contract to buy the item at the price shown from the seller.
I can't understand the pricing either but I think the posting of the item and obtaining the images and files was automated by scripts. there was one item that's volume was 5.3cm^3 and it's price was $53 so that times by 10 to get that price.

These guys weren't clever just lazy and stupid by ripping a lot of items off and sticking them on eBay

---

Supporting 3D Printers with Parts and Build services.
Printer: Ormerod 2 (528.4) Duel extruder set-up with Aluminium X-Rib, RRPro Firmware v1.11-ch (2016-04-08)

I'm not saying this guy isn't a jerk but look how many people sell 3d printed parts for printers and printer kits isn't that the same thing? Maybe some of them get permission from the designer but I doubt they all do.

---

Newbie with Folgertech 2020 i3.

It depends upon what license is attached to those parts or designs

I'm aware that @RichRap3D has done an article on licences and open source in
Disruptive Magazine [disruptivemagazine.com]
Article starts at page 11

---

Supporting 3D Printers with Parts and Build services.
Printer: Ormerod 2 (528.4) Duel extruder set-up with Aluminium X-Rib, RRPro Firmware v1.11-ch (2016-04-08)

I understand the train of thought that these scenarios are bad, and am definitely not defending it.

I do, however, see the flip side as well, brought up by "amigob".

My first 3d printer, was an Ebay purchase of a DaVinci 1.0. Unfortunately, those things had quite a few flaws in the beginning, one of which being very weak plastic bearing holders for the X axis rods. Of course, mine were broken when the unit arrived, and since it was an Ebay purchase, XYZ was unable to provide service.

The printer was DoA. - And I ended up having to find a seller that had 3d modeled the exact pieces of plastic I needed to get it all working again. I didn't have any other printers I could rely on at the time, nor knew anybody else that did that I could just have them print for me. Regardless of the ethics of it all, whether or not the person I purchased from made the models himself, or grabbed them off thingiverse - there's a proper-use scenario here that I couldn't have even used the printer unless I was able to contact the seller. - And for $3.00 x 4 ($12 total) the printer's been using them ever since.

Again, not defending the ethics of the whole matter, just showing that in some cases it's not a horrible thing.

Quote
usslindstrom
My first 3d printer, was an Ebay purchase of a DaVinci 1.0. Unfortunately, those things had quite a few flaws in the beginning, one of which being very weak plastic bearing holders for the X axis rods. Of course, mine were broken when the unit arrived, and since it was an Ebay purchase, XYZ was unable to provide service.

I'd say that this is an unethical thing on the part of XYZ. What difference does it make to them whether you bought their product directly off them, off eBay, or off anyone else? Looks to me like XYZ is just trying to undermine the second-hand market for their products, so they can sell more new printers. If XYZ aren't going to be ethical and reasonable, then *my* ethics say that their other ethical rights are now up for review, and I would have followed the same route as you.

However, just3dprint is another kettle of fish. They're not providing something which is only accessible that way. In fact, I believe that they've deliberately chosen to not acknowledge the open source of what they sell, because this would undermine their own pricing. They've chosen to use other people's work without consideration so that they can rip off their own customers. Apparently they can't even be bothered to do *anything* when all that is required is to acknowledge the author. It's an intentional ripoff, where they feel the design is good enough to sell (otherwise why would they try to sell it?) but the creator of the work is so irrelevant that they can't even acknowledge, let alone pay, him.

Quote
msaeger
I'm not saying this guy isn't a jerk but look how many people sell 3d printed parts for printers and printer kits isn't that the same thing? Maybe some of them get permission from the designer but I doubt they all do.

No it's not the same. Almost nobody would release files for a 3D printer under the non commercial license, that means it's perfectly fine and ethical to sell them. Also they would then take their own photo instead of stealing someone else's and using it in the ad.

Fresh Faced Little Buggers, fresh out of sunday school, there going to hell dont worry, eternal damnation...
unless of course they confess next sunday, we did it for America! we thought everything was free

It is the brainchild of four Philadelphia-based students, and is currently part of a startup incubator at the Wharton School called the Wharton Venture Initiation Program (VIP), with the young company receiving “expert guidance” from a group of senior professionals.

Obviously the fourth mastermind (member) is hiding behind the camera....

Shapeways Legal Expert seems a little unsure of things

Shapeways' legal expert Michael Weinberg, who has written two articles (here and here) about the company’s actions since the story became a talking point on Thursday. Although the writer admits to there being gray areas around CAD copyrighting, he sees numerous holes in just3Dprint’s case. “I think it is safe to say that I’m skeptical of just3Dprint’s claims,” Weinberg wrote. “There are situations where just3Dprint may not need the permission of a designer to reprint and sell a model uploaded to Thingiverse, but none of the justifications offered feel legitimate to me or seem to address those situations.”

The Icing on the cake is stealing the photo's too.

Same happened to me a few times, as Ive mentioned before, I've had a few web addresses copied, one of them was BeatSkool,
this media company in the netherlands called dpdk(owned by a lawyer, son of another lawyer), 50 staff, links to big players all over the world, created an app...called beatskool...even though they where looking for designers, I never got a call....but they still stole the catchy name, and tried to dev this crappy mobile app, and in the mockup of the app they even had a similar picture to one that features heavily in my stuff...I phoned them, they laughed, didnt offer work, so I copied their name, and created a webpage that told the story.... www.dpdk.co.uk

Quote
MechaBits
Shapeways' legal expert Michael Weinberg, who has written two articles (here and here) about the company’s actions since the story became a talking point on Thursday.

Where are the links for (here and here)?

---

Bob Morrison
Wörth am Rhein, Germany
"Luke, use the source!"
BLOG - PHOTOS - Thingiverse

obviously they didnt come across, I'll dig them out for you,

[michaelweinberg.org]

there's one you can probably find other from there,

when I say seems unsure, I mean that these guys are guilty, seems to sit on the fence a little.
Morally wrong but legally not covered.
If they cant be had on stealing the CAD for commercial purpose they could still be had for using the photo's.
Assuming you are willing to delve deep in your pockets to pay a lawyer who tells you you have an interesting case and I would be happy to fight it for you....after you have paid us.

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2016 07:53AM by MechaBits.

Quote
tmorris9

Quote
msaeger
I'm not saying this guy isn't a jerk but look how many people sell 3d printed parts for printers and printer kits isn't that the same thing? Maybe some of them get permission from the designer but I doubt they all do.

No it's not the same. Almost nobody would release files for a 3D printer under the non commercial license, that means it's perfectly fine and ethical to sell them. Also they would then take their own photo instead of stealing someone else's and using it in the ad.

Even websites like youmagine still offer the "print on 3D-hubs" button, even if you select a NC license....

When putting files online there is only one license useful , the one that give`s all rights away (CC-SA, or similar), even the attribution.
As most of the people releasing such files are just hobbyists they just can`t afford a lawyer to go against any license infringements.
Every other license is useless, because there will always come up some guy`s giving a f*#k on your work and selling it anyways.
Had the same trouble with some of my designs.

At least you have only two options, release it with a "free for all" license, or don`t release them at all anymore.

for me i decided to go with the second option, gives me less headache.

Chri

---

[chrisu02.wordpress.com] Quadmax Intel Delid Tools

Thingiverse is posting a statement now on their starting page.

At least you could interpret it as an answer to the IP-discussion. But they don't offer to take any legal steps for us.

I hope, I didn't have to ask them for posting their picture here ( couldn't add a direct link )
-Olaf

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2016 02:57AM by o_lampe.

What the hell does that mean, we respect your decision not to give us any more free models?

UPDATE

I finally received a notice from ebay about my parts listed by just3dprint, they said we received your request but the item is no longer listed so no action is taken.

I went online to verify it and I found that all the items just3dprint was selling have been removed. I don't have any information other than that, his account is still valid so I don't know if they voluntarily took it down or if they were forced to by ebay or some other outside force.

Result! Direct Action with a little community help, bypassing the expensive & slow route.