Have you ever wanted a rare Lego or Star Wars figure? Or a Royal Doulton and Lladró figurine? The ABC ‘Future Tense’ program recently featured 3D printing as the next disruptive technology; that will challenge IP owners control over the reproduction of 3D objects.
3D printers may not have the same instant and total disruptive impact on existing business models – such as experienced by the music and film industries with P2P technology. However there are some niche products like Lego (of course a giant in its field of business) that should be wary of the potential for 3D printers have an impact where home users of 3D printers can ‘contour craft’ rare figurines. Indeed the technology as wide applications such as creating any spare part for any product that can be made out of the materials used in 3D printers.
3D printers are not new technology, they have existed since the 1970’s as machines “that can turn a blue print into a physical object”.[1] Rather than being a reductive technology, like a lathe cutting away at a block, a 3D printer builds the object up layer by layer. 3D printing was once titled “rapid prototyping”, with “additive manufacturing” now being used to describe what others call 3D printing.[2] The 3D object emerges when layers of metallic powder or plastic, about tenth of a millimetre thick, are sprayed by a printing devices that then is melted with a laser or a resin is added to bind the powder.[3]
What has changed in recent years is that 3D printers have stopped being high priced equipment used for prototyping 3D objects, with prices ranging from $15,000 for a low-end model to $450,000 for a high-end 3D printer. Now those enthusiastic enough to want to build their own 3D printer can construct one from components costing from as little as $600 to $1,300.
.
3D printing is now a low cost, do-it-your-self technology, with the plans and source code for programming a ‘RepRap’ or a ‘MakerBot’ 3D printer being available under an open source licence, with the 3D model file, the code needed to program a 3D printer, being made available under Creative Commons licences at websites, such as at Thingiverse.
3D printing is becoming a disruptive technology as it has the potential to allow individuals and commercial enterprises to replicate 3D objects that may be subject to intellectual property rights that may exist in copyrighted CAD (Computer Assisted Design) plans or the intellectual property rights that exist in the 3D object that is a registered design or a copyrighted artistic work in a 3D object such as a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship.
In the near future, do-it-your-self 3D printing technology is likely to have low impact on existing business due to the technology not achieving the fidelity of replication that can be achieved with high-end 3D printers, however Bradshaw, Bowyer and Hauf comment that “as its ease-of-use, fidelity and range of materials increases, so will its attractiveness and range of applications.”[4]
3D printing challenges the whole range of intellectual property rights with 3 objects potentially being a registered design or covered by copyright, patent protection or protected by trade marks. With Creative Commons and open source licences for 3D printer plans and 3D model files needed to program the 3D printers there can be a new world of 3D objects being produced using this technology. It is when people are tempted to replicate Lego and Star Wars figures, spare parts and other 3D objects that are protected by intellectual property rights – then the disruptive nature of 3D printing technology will emerge.
[1] Michael Weinberg, It Will Be Awesome If They Don’t Screw It Up: 3D Printing, Intellectual Property, and the Fight Over the Next Great Disruptive Technology, November 2010 Public Knowledge (Washington D.C.) http://www.publicknowledge.org/it-will-be-awesome-if-they-dont-screw-it-up
[2] “The 3-D Printer”, ABC ‘Future Tense’ program with Antony Funnell, broadcast 28 April 2011, at 8.30 am http://www.abc.net.au/rn/futuretense/stories/2011/3194762.htm
[3] “The 3-D Printer”, ABC ‘Future Tense’ program.
[4] Simon Bradshaw, Adrian Bowyer and Patrick Hauf, The Intellectual Property Implications of Low-Cost 3D Printing, 7:1 (2010) SCRIPTed http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrc/script-ed/vol7-1/bradshaw.asp
No comments:
Post a Comment