Most Americans think of manufacturing as something that happens very far away. They believe that it has nothing to do with them, they are simply the consumer of the end product. Three-dimensional (3D) printing is drastically different from all current models of production and it is starting to blur the line between consumers and producers (Finocchiaro). This new technology allows physical products to be printed as easily as words can be printed on a piece of paper and is rapidly becoming more prevalent in consumers ' homes (Brean). 3D printing uses an additive manufacturing process, in which products are constructed layer by layer, with a series of cross sectional slices. The models for these products are created using 3D Computer Aided Design
…show more content…
The first incident involved a dispute over a 3D printed version of the Penrose Triangle, a famous optical illusion. The Dutch designer of the Triangle, Ulrich Schwanitz, uploaded a video of his physical rendering on YouTube and wanted to sell copies for $70 through Shapeways. Within a couple weeks, a former Shapeways intern managed to reverse engineer the design by watching the video. He then released his version of the schematic for free onto Thingiverse. Schwanitz filed a Digital Millennium Copyright Act take down request, becoming the first one ever filed with regards to 3D printing. Ultimately, Schwanitz released his design for free as well because of public outcry. This incident started the debate about intellectual property laws in regards to 3D printing (Finocchiaro). Just like this one, all other incidents were resolved without litigation. The courts haven 't had the opportunity yet to decide on disputes involving intellectual property laws and consumer 3D printing. Past case laws may be helpful when looking for analogies and insight into how the courts might approach this conflict. “Two potentially useful precedents are Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., which established the "substantial noninfringing uses" doctrine applied first to the video tape recorder.” This ruled that the making of individual copies of tv …show more content…
Another issue is the illegal manufacturing of guns. Senator Chuck Schumer proposed legislation that would ban 3D guns and stated “We’re facing a situation where anyone—a felon, a terrorist—can open a gun factory in their garage and the weapons they make will be undetectable. It’s stomach-churning.” Currently under federal law, “it is legal to make pistols, revolvers, and rifles at home. For semi-automatic rifles, such as the AR-15, it is legal to make the lower receiver—the lower receiver is what makes a gun a “gun.” As long as the gun is not being sold, shared, or traded, no license is required.” Making a gun in the traditional manner is a hard thing to do, however 3D printing makes this a very easy and concealable task, allowing even felons to secretly create a gun. Currently, 3D printers do nothing to stop these types of weapons from being made on them (Blackman). Here is a video that blew up on social media awhile back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rej9n3CDtRY
The first incident involved a dispute over a 3D printed version of the Penrose Triangle, a famous optical illusion. The Dutch designer of the Triangle, Ulrich Schwanitz, uploaded a video of his physical rendering on YouTube and wanted to sell copies for $70 through Shapeways. Within a couple weeks, a former Shapeways intern managed to reverse engineer the design by watching the video. He then released his version of the schematic for free onto Thingiverse. Schwanitz filed a Digital Millennium Copyright Act take down request, becoming the first one ever filed with regards to 3D printing. Ultimately, Schwanitz released his design for free as well because of public outcry. This incident started the debate about intellectual property laws in regards to 3D printing (Finocchiaro). Just like this one, all other incidents were resolved without litigation. The courts haven 't had the opportunity yet to decide on disputes involving intellectual property laws and consumer 3D printing. Past case laws may be helpful when looking for analogies and insight into how the courts might approach this conflict. “Two potentially useful precedents are Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., which established the "substantial noninfringing uses" doctrine applied first to the video tape recorder.” This ruled that the making of individual copies of tv …show more content…
Another issue is the illegal manufacturing of guns. Senator Chuck Schumer proposed legislation that would ban 3D guns and stated “We’re facing a situation where anyone—a felon, a terrorist—can open a gun factory in their garage and the weapons they make will be undetectable. It’s stomach-churning.” Currently under federal law, “it is legal to make pistols, revolvers, and rifles at home. For semi-automatic rifles, such as the AR-15, it is legal to make the lower receiver—the lower receiver is what makes a gun a “gun.” As long as the gun is not being sold, shared, or traded, no license is required.” Making a gun in the traditional manner is a hard thing to do, however 3D printing makes this a very easy and concealable task, allowing even felons to secretly create a gun. Currently, 3D printers do nothing to stop these types of weapons from being made on them (Blackman). Here is a video that blew up on social media awhile back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rej9n3CDtRY