The dispute between the hottest 3D printing and it

The "grudge" between 3D printing and its copyright

with the growing intensity of 3D printing, it has also become more and more important in people's hearts. Because of its unique technological advantages and potential huge commercial value, its copyright has aroused everyone's contention

3d printing era is approaching. U.S. President Barack Obama even mentioned its name in his 2013 state of the Union address! This sci-fi technology comes at a time when the rain is coming and the wind is blowing all over the building. And there are also a large number of lawyers who rely on copyright law

the future of printing a real world as easily as a dial is not far away. Today, because of the great Internet, we can easily circulate MP3 files and HD movies. Tomorrow, we can also easily download 3D images for our makerbot printer

as far as we know, the first rectification order related to 3D printing was two years ago. The legal basis is the Millennium Digital Copyright Act enacted in 1998. At that time, 3D artist ulrichschwantiz created a realistic version of Penrose triangle, which was borrowed by others (note that it was only borrowed, not plagiarized), which led to a copyright infringement lawsuit. However, the artist himself voluntarily withdrew the lawsuit and made his design public

in this history, this is because both of them are the first 3D infringement cases on elastomer materials, which involve only disputes between individuals. Now the more affluent copyright owners have been involved in right and wrong. With the development of 3D communities such as thingiverse and shapeways, where users spontaneously upload content, it is believed that more and more products applying trademarks or copyrights will appear, followed by warnings, lawsuits and even all kinds of unexpected precedent cases from copyright owners

the wrong love between copyright and 3D printing is not as clear as in the field of music or film. Generally, products that emphasize more practicality than artistry are not included in the effectiveness of copyright law. Of course, some things can be patented, but the premise is that it does not live broadcast on the official Weibo of Beijing subway and Beijing Hong Kong subway, and the congestion at large passenger stations can be too common. For example, you can't patent a chair unless you design a completely new set of chairs

but when you design some unusual decoration for the armrest of a chair, this problem is a little complicated. If someone downloads your design and prints out an identical one, can you chase him and sue him for infringement? Like SARFT, which chases BT electric donkey as soon as it comes to sensitive period

courts generally adopt the so-called separability test standard in dealing with lawsuits related to copyright and objects. In other words, if you can separate the aesthetic part of the object from the practical part, the artistic part will be protected by copyright, and the practical part will not count

it seems that no one clearly knows how to deal with the grudge between copyright and 3D printing. People are watching the trend of technology, but also firmly waiting for more judgments. 3: hydraulic universal wood testing machine. Main uses of hydraulic universal wood testing machine: example. It can be expected that these precedents will be as dizzying as the rapidly changing 3D printing technology

this article comes from the Internet. The copyright belongs to the original author and is only for everyone to share. 3. Tensile experiment: learning. If the author believes that infringement is involved, please contact us, and we will delete it immediately after verification