Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Copyright vs. 3D printing

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#21

Post by steveklabnik »

teamonkey wrote: post #20
steveklabnik wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did. It was also available to download for free on the Internet. "No IP" does not mean "You can't charge for things." Enough people would rather go to a movie theater than get on Bittorrent that he made his money back. Side note: I was one of those people. I wear Pirate Bay tshirts around, I'd throw out all IP law if I was in charge... but I did pay money to go to the theater to see Avatar. Going to the theater an…

The fact that it worked for one movie does not mean that it would work any other movie. The hook with Avatar was that it was a spectacle deliberately designed to be seen in 3D on the biggest screen possible, to the extent that there's very little point not seeing it in a movie theatre. It's a unique example and its impact (and profitability) would be lessened by a) competition by similar movies and b) greater adoptio…

Absolutely. There's no question that without IP, things would be different. The real question is if it would be a better or worse world.

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#24

Post by clistctrl »

I would assume it would be almost exactly the same as digital media works today, while it is best to manufacture things in mass quantities a CD of the machines components will be shipped with the dish washer. The opening of the box will imply acceptance of the licensing agreement for the machine. An alternative, is you get access to the washing machine support site with the warranty number included. You would be purchasing the right to the design, and maybe 1 working copy of a part at a time.

if we ever got to the point where it makes more sense for you to manufacture the entire product at home, then the concept would be the same. You are purchasing the rights to manufacture 1 working copy. If you give the files to another person who uses them, technically they are breaking the law.

Of course I think this is all kind of ridiculous. However the only solution I can think of to combat piracy is to crowd source the funding to the creation of new plans, and release the product in the public domain.

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#25

Post by Yzupnick »

steveklabnik wrote: post #15
jimbojohn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But he recouped the money through charging people to see the movie. Not a counter-example at all.

He did. It was also available to download for free on the Internet. "No IP" does not mean "You can't charge for things." Enough people would rather go to a movie theater than get on Bittorrent that he made his money back. Side note: I was one of those people. I wear Pirate Bay tshirts around, I'd throw out all IP law if I was in charge... but I did pay money to go to the theater to see Avatar. Going to the theater an…

>Enough people would rather go to a movie theater then get on Bittorrent

True, but i guarantee that Movie theaters would rather get on Bittorrent rather than pay millions of dollars in fees to James Cameron. The only thing stopping them is IP laws.

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#26

Post by alanh »

steveklabnik wrote: post #21
teamonkey wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it worked for one movie does not mean that it would work any other movie. The hook with Avatar was that it was a spectacle deliberately designed to be seen in 3D on the biggest screen possible, to the extent that there's very little point not seeing it in a movie theatre. It's a unique example and its impact (and profitability) would be lessened by a) competition by similar movies and b) greater adoptio…

Absolutely. There's no question that without IP, things would be different. The real question is if it would be a better or worse world.

In my mind, the answer is “better” if we also no longer need to worry about money (that is, a post-capitalist system). I’m not sure about the meantime.

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#27

Post by steveklabnik »

alanh wrote: post #26
steveklabnik wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. There's no question that without IP, things would be different. The real question is if it would be a better or worse world.

In my mind, the answer is “better” if we also no longer need to worry about money (that is, a post-capitalist system). I’m not sure about the meantime.

The book that I cited up there in my huge post actually lays out a pretty compelling argument that it even works within capitalism.

IP is a pretty new concept. Things have worked really well for a long time without it.

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#28

Post by teamonkey »

steveklabnik wrote: post #27
alanh wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my mind, the answer is “better” if we also no longer need to worry about money (that is, a post-capitalist system). I’m not sure about the meantime.

The book that I cited up there in my huge post actually lays out a pretty compelling argument that it even works within capitalism. IP is a pretty new concept. Things have worked really well for a long time without it.

Yes, capitalism is a pretty new concept also. The two go hand-in-hand.

But never before in history have we been able to copy media ad infinitum for practically zero time, cost and effort. It's always required time, an educated, talented person to copy, or resources that had a real cost.

In the case of the 3D printer the only real expense is the plastic used to print the object, which is awesome only for those who manufacture the materials.

Re: Copyright vs. 3D printing

#29

Post by steveklabnik »

teamonkey wrote: post #28
steveklabnik wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The book that I cited up there in my huge post actually lays out a pretty compelling argument that it even works within capitalism. IP is a pretty new concept. Things have worked really well for a long time without it.

Yes, capitalism is a pretty new concept also. The two go hand-in-hand. But never before in history have we been able to copy media ad infinitum for practically zero time, cost and effort. It's always required time, an educated, talented person to copy, or resources that had a real cost. In the case of the 3D printer the only real expense is the plastic used to print the object, which is awesome only for those who man…

Actually, it's pretty funny: the materials are the only place where they make their money. 3D printers are sold on a total razor and blade model, the machine manufacturers make 70% of their money from materials, and something like 5% on actual machines.

Then things like this happen: http://open3dp.me.washington.edu/2009/10/sugar-sugar-powder/

> The cost of this mix is $0.15 – $0.30 per pound!

Post reply on HN