Jump to content
Can't remember your login details? Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Sir_Substance

Physical piracy

Recommended Posts

Aren't we kind of forgetting that we can already build our own Commodore if we so choose?

 

Would it really be that much harder to use today's techniques of casting etc. to create a replica of a Commodore?

 

To reference the OP, it would be pretty darn trivial to manufacture your own Lego bricks (they're just plastic bricks).

 

 

Lego stop you from giving a Chinese manufacturing firm the dimensions, and manufacturing your own, because they own the patents and trademarks.

 

 

I don't see how the commercialization of 3D printers doesn't really compound the issue any more.

 

 

Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure physical devices are not protected by copyright, they are however protected by designs and patents.

But those don't prevent private duplication provided you don't distribute or commercially exploit them.

 

e.g. you could clone a Holden Commodore for personal use and it would be legal (although cloning the badges might be a trademark infringement)

I think it is very, very safe to assume that even though nothing may exist now, copyright like laws would be created to cover the duplication of physical devices for personal use.

 

I imaging the bulk of such legislation would revolve around the distribution and possession of the schematics required to build such a device. Possession of a copied item would also be targeted, but could be hard (and not cost effective) to police, especially for very mundane items like lego.

 

Without such rules in place, there would be a severe reduction in innovation. Why would Ferrari develop a new car if it were to be legally made free of charge by all of their customers (assuming build quality is the same)?

 

It would be just as morally wrong to copy a car as it would to copy a movie. You can pull at all the same little gray areas - if I build it myself its 50% stronger - I couldn't afford it anyway - I want a backup car. In the end its an unauthorized copy that if were at the same quality as the original and freely available, would destroy the industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't steal a car, the Hollywood studios like to remind you.

 

But suppose you're out and about in the city one day, and you see a parked Ferrari. You then release your swarm of nanotech smart dust to map out the car, non-destructively copy its construction, and build you another Ferrari from the surrounding dirt.

Would you do it?

Sifn't!

 

Let me know when that smart dust hits the shelves...

 

I think it is very, very safe to assume that even though nothing may exist now, copyright like laws would be created to cover the duplication of physical devices for personal use.

 

I imaging the bulk of such legislation would revolve around the distribution and possession of the schematics required to build such a device. Possession of a copied item would also be targeted, but could be hard (and not cost effective) to police, especially for very mundane items like lego.

 

Without such rules in place, there would be a severe reduction in innovation. Why would Ferrari develop a new car if it were to be legally made free of charge by all of their customers (assuming build quality is the same)?

 

It would be just as morally wrong to copy a car as it would to copy a movie. You can pull at all the same little gray areas - if I build it myself its 50% stronger - I couldn't afford it anyway - I want a backup car. In the end its an unauthorized copy that if were at the same quality as the original and freely available, would destroy the industry.

I'm not sure that sentiment gels that well with the one expressed by the quote in your tag...

 

IMO there's no stopping folks copying stuff for personal use, and the moral ground for attempting to stop them is pretty dubious.

 

I say roll with the punches or get trapped in amber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty of other companies out there that make cheap ripoffs of lego bricks, that work with real lego, so I don't see that example as being much of a problem.

 

Actually, I don't see any of it as being a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when 3d printing is capable of being used to produce verbatim components, i would imagine that materials would be price adjusted and regulated.

 

 

At uni we were looking at unconventional manufacturing processes and we ended up covering electron beam free form fabrication via metal deposition.

 

not unlike abs extrusion in 3d printing, though as tempting as those kits are like raprep and maker bot, having seen the best of the best at an industry trade show these are primitive ( even the nasa stuff).

bits of kit that use direct metal laser sintering, or print moving components, theyse guys made a 1x1m square of a ceramic/polymer material of chain mail, ( yes it moved). also printed out moving 2 stroke radial engine with out any assembly as well as a very simple gear box.

 

wemay not have gotten, inteligent robots, reach the depths of space, flying cars and teleportation but now we have machines that can make other machines and upgrades to its self and to make what ever we want ( almost) when we want :)

Yeah I studied this last year I believe. Laser sintering is seriously cool stuff!

 

what you studyin?

 

Bachelor Mechanical Engineering. It was part of a manufacturing process course...

 

Yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't steal a car, the Hollywood studios like to remind you.

 

But suppose you're out and about in the city one day, and you see a parked Ferrari. You then release your swarm of nanotech smart dust to map out the car, non-destructively copy its construction, and build you another Ferrari from the surrounding dirt.

Would you do it?

Sifn't!

 

Let me know when that smart dust hits the shelves...

 

I think it is very, very safe to assume that even though nothing may exist now, copyright like laws would be created to cover the duplication of physical devices for personal use.

 

I imaging the bulk of such legislation would revolve around the distribution and possession of the schematics required to build such a device. Possession of a copied item would also be targeted, but could be hard (and not cost effective) to police, especially for very mundane items like lego.

 

Without such rules in place, there would be a severe reduction in innovation. Why would Ferrari develop a new car if it were to be legally made free of charge by all of their customers (assuming build quality is the same)?

 

It would be just as morally wrong to copy a car as it would to copy a movie. You can pull at all the same little gray areas - if I build it myself its 50% stronger - I couldn't afford it anyway - I want a backup car. In the end its an unauthorized copy that if were at the same quality as the original and freely available, would destroy the industry.

I'm not sure that sentiment gels that well with the one expressed by the quote in your tag...

 

IMO there's no stopping folks copying stuff for personal use, and the moral ground for attempting to stop them is pretty dubious.

 

I say roll with the punches or get trapped in amber.

 

They don't have to gel, they refer to two different parts of the product chain. My tag applies to who should get the patent - the first to apply (bringing forth) or the first to invent (locking up). My post applies to rights once that patent is granted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was just thinking along the lines of two things:

 

The idea of a 3d printer, and Dan rutters article on hardware piracy.

 

A lot of people here feel that using a computer to copy software deigned and sold by someone else is wrong, so I ask you this:

 

Would it, in your opinion, be wrong to use a 3D printer to print your own lego bricks and pieces, rather then buying box kits?

 

i say no, unless you plan to sell them under the name "BLEGO" or something :p

 

in relation to pirating music or programs, its no different to getting a band together and playing someone elses songs, or programming your own version of the software, you cant sell it unless said band authorises you to sell the cover of their song.

 

downloading the music/software however i think is different to this, as it directly affects the artists/developers by removing the potential of a sale.

Edited by ayefkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be just as morally wrong to copy a car as it would to copy a movie. You can pull at all the same little gray areas - if I build it myself its 50% stronger - I couldn't afford it anyway - I want a backup car. In the end its an unauthorized copy that if were at the same quality as the original and freely available, would destroy the industry.

Molecular construction will destroy industry regardless. Hopefully they've better learnt how to handle IP by then.. likely with molecular level trademarks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Custom minifigs

 

If you search around on the site, you can also find various blocks.

If you're going to link a minifig site, at least link the best one.

 

 

'

 

Meh, I'm using that site to make something else and in my travels through it I found them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Home cooking is killing the restaurant business.

 

I get the feeling you don't really understand the analogy you just wrote. But hey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on individual morals. There is no one "moral code".

There isn't an absolute "right" moral...

 

But if you would be annoyed that someone was making their own verbatim copies of your product and not paying you (whether they sell it or not), then you'd be a hypocrite if you decided to copy other people's products.

 

 

Again, depends on individual moral code. A lot i would/wouldn't do, other have no issue with. And vice versa.

 

Also, morals don't really come into it, the law will end up fucking you either way.

Edited by Midnighter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fdsc automotive engineering

though if i elect to do the third year i get bachelor of BSc Mechancal Design and Manufacture or want beng manufacture engineering with focus on advanced composites i think:S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×