Live data from Hacker News

Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

josefprusa.com

351–360 of 450 posts

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP is just too strong. The terms are ridiculously long (especially for copyright), there are multiple workarounds for "fair use", such as DMCA, and patents on simple concepts like linked lists are not laughed out of the room. All of this stuff needs to be weakened (and shortened). Part of the reason Chinese companies are able to iterate quickly on technology like 3d printers or drones is that it's possible to simply…

It's not a binary too string / too weak. It's that _copyright_: - protects the wrong entities (corporations instead of individuals who did the real work) - IP should be collectively owned by the people who created it and selling it should be illegal, - is too long, yes - DMCA can be used to harass without actually owning the IP and there are no penalties - the fair use exception can be used to allow clear cases of pl…

I'm really fascinated about heavy downvotes for your post because it makes a lot of sense.

I wonder who the people who show up to defend IP law are in these conversations. Why do it? What's the gain?

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#352
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And obviously China is a global parasite. Britain said the same things about the US in the early days. We told them to f* off about copyright/patent stuff quite often.

Britain was also putting into place laws/regulations/policies requiring that the U.S. purchase from British manufacturers rather than developing native production --- there's a reason why the first printing press in North America was in Mexico.

Which is pretty much what patent law ends up being right? The patent holder telling the licensee the conditions.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#353
post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that patents are so (intentionally) difficult to understand that even patented technology is basically trade secrets now anyway. And the useful designs are protected by NDAs.

You can't put a NDA on a Patent. NDAs are basically the modern version of guilds. Imagine a world where absolutely everything about your job is kept under a strict NDA. This is true of startups, but it doesn't scale, especially once you start actually selling product and need to make customers happy to get the sale.

> You can't put a NDA on a Patent.

On the patent itself, no. But on design docs, CAD files, source code, circuit diagrams, etc. you can, and it is common practice to require NDAs for anyone who has access to them. And in some cases copyright law is also used to protect them.

> Imagine a world where absolutely everything about your job is kept under a strict NDA. This is true of startups, but it doesn't scale, especially once you start actually selling product and need to make customers happy to get the sale.

This is already a reality at many companies, including large ones.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a feeling that soon, proprietary software won't be a business moat at all. No mater the complexity of your software, it will be too easy to replicate. That could be a good thing for open source. One way of staying ahead of your competition is to control the most popular open source repo.

> One way of staying ahead of your competition is to control the most popular open source repo. How so? I'm not sure what benefits that bestows the repo owner. Meta may run the React Native repo, for example, but I'm not sure how that is impacting Microsoft (who use React Native more and more, including deeply embedded in Windows) competitively negatively in any way.

I was thinking along the lines of, for example, a mobile phone company that controls the worlds most popular open source smart phone operating system. In theory, since they are guiding the development of the mobile OS, they should be the first to be able to release hardware that takes advantage of the newest versions of the software. They could tailor their hardware to perfectly fit the future of the software.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#355
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's telling that before the Patent system the solution was secretive guilds that jealously (sometimes lethally) guarded their secrets to avoid competition. This was obviously terrible since it greatly slowed down innovation. I'm not sure what the correct solution is to this problem. We want to avoid anything that causes a return of the guild system, but at the same time we don't want small inventors steamrolled by l…

(Repeating for umpteenth time:) I wish patent fees were exponential. Pay $10 the first year, $40 the second year, $160 the third year,.. $10,485,760 the tenth year, etc. The patent expires and goes to public domain the first year when the fee has not been not paid. This way there'd be enough time to commercialize an invention for basically peanuts, so the small guy won't be dissuaded from doing so. OTOH holding on a…

That still seems pretty easy to game by re-filing slight variations of the original patents

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>schematic that I could download that way wouldn't be affected by patents, as long as I'm not selling it not true, there's no personal use exemption for patents

There effectively is a common law exemption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_exemption

the research exemption, at least in the us, is /very/ limited

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#358
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Repeating for umpteenth time:) I wish patent fees were exponential. Pay $10 the first year, $40 the second year, $160 the third year,.. $10,485,760 the tenth year, etc. The patent expires and goes to public domain the first year when the fee has not been not paid. This way there'd be enough time to commercialize an invention for basically peanuts, so the small guy won't be dissuaded from doing so. OTOH holding on a…

That still seems pretty easy to game by re-filing slight variations of the original patents

Won't these be invalidated by having prior art already in public domain?

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, in the States, you can own a small business, come up with a good idea, and someone can just copy it and compete against you regardless if it's copyright infringement or not. And that's in the context of a domestic legal issue. You have to be able to defend your intellectual property, and that's expensive, which is the parent comment's point. I mean, imagine you, AlexandrB, come up with some good idea, sta…

People who aren't rich already don't have any intellectual property anyway. The idea of nobody having them seems inherently more suitable insofar as someone could as it stands just ignore your property anyway with the primary difference in this hypothetical reality that instead of being able to copy you AND shut you down they just copy you.

Maybe the real problem is that easy low-hanging-fruit inventions attainable by individuals in the garage are long gone, and are now so capital intensive that it doesn't make sense to keep the system in hopes of protecting this fictional small inventor.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#360
post #139
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese stuff these days has pulled far ahead of the Harbor Freight reputation of my youth. I can't remember the last time I've seen a proper "Engrish" instruction manual, most of the things are well designed and well built. Meanwhile, the "good old American brands" seem to just be selling out for cheaper and better profit margin products, so you'll be ending up with Chinese stuff anyways, which is sometimes worse th…

> a proper "Engrish" instruction manual At what point do the instruction manuals stop catering to Engrish and start focusing on 汉字?

Recently I've bought a Xiaomi beard trimmer on AliExpress and its box and manual are 100% in Chinese. Google Translate took care of it.

Why did I buy a Xiaomi beard trimmer on AliExpress? It looks like all western brands decided to keep using NiMH batteries on their designs, and I really don't like my trimmers dying in the middle of a cut and me, now with a half-shaved beard, having to wait 12 hours for it to recharge. Xiaomi did something very revolutionary: used a Li-Ion battery.

Post reply on HN