Kevin,
I see great potential for modelers in 3D printing, although I also see some legal issues arising due to infringement. What is your sense/ feeling on that issue?
I think having this Technical Modeling forum will be great. It’s not a matter of “if”, only “when” it will impact the hobby. It’s here now. I just received a copy of a new magazine called “The Digital Machinist” geared toward the hobbyist involved in CNC modeling using CAD programs and 3D printing and modeling. All kinds of new machinery for the home hobbyist. Moving rapidly, but there will ALWAYS be the need of the “hands on modeler”, the old way.
As a side note regarding technology. In my other life before reitirement, I was a “Die Sinker”, one who machines cavities into die steel for drop forgings and press forgings. When I started the trade in the early sixties, this work was done on huge machines called hydrotels (developed in the late thirties). Hydraulic machines controlled by turning handles to move a table, ram and spindle in three axis’s to remove steel and machine the cavity. This was all handwork (free hand) and some wood models were made to let a stylus follow a wood model made by pattern makers (another lost trade). In the early nineties, I went back to school to learn a CAD system (MasterCam) to program CNC mills. Came at just the right time to start machining dies in large CNC mills. When I retired in 2003, virtually ALL of our forging dies were machined in CNC mills and hydrotels were scrapped for the price of the steel in their castings. $200,000 machines were scrapped for $500 or less! That’s how technology works and it happenes everyday!
Free figure modeling, posing and clothing software can be found here:
http://www.daz3d.com/products/
You can purchase additional people, clothes, props, etc.
I have not looked at their 3D print licensing rules in a while, previously it was interpreted as- if you owned the 3D printer you were printing on, there were no issues. The issue was the transfer of digital mesh through third parties (ie like shapeways)
Bob Cope said:
Craig has the right of it as far as the modeling goes. Some “digital models” can be very challenging to produce.
Bob C.
Right now I’m trying to draw up a GN Snow Dozer in Sketchup in order to figure out a couple of different things. The first one is to take a 2D drawing and convert it to 3D so I can see different angles that I don’t have pictures of, or have drawings of. The second is that I plan to make it operable, so by using a CAD program I can see how much room I would have for servos, etc. I could do all of this by hand, but I feel like I would be making a bunch of scrap. It’s much easier to delete a drawing line that’s off by a few thousands of an inch than scrap a whole sheet of styrene because of the same problem.
Here’s some pictures to help explain.
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5344/9518899025_b59cf39f8b_c.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7337/9617114021_e94c586378_c.jpg)
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3803/9518898349_aafc76227f_c.jpg)
i am completely smitten by the whole 3D-printing thingy.
although i would never want to print, let’s say, a trestle, it would be marvellous to be able to print all the fake boltheads and such.
or printing out heads for use with selfmade clay figures.
i am just waiting, that the scanning systems evolve a bit further too.
Joe, there are two “infringement” issues that might come up as I can see it:
First, if someone makes a 3D drawing of an existing commercial product, then publishes the resulting drawing to the web for others to print at will.
Second, someone takes a drawing from a site where it’s implicit that the plans are for non-commercial use only, and starts printing out commercial parts using the files.
But if you’re creating the drawings from your own research (or imagination), then they’re your original works. If you publish them to a public domain site, then you’re explicitly giving others permission to use your drawings for non-commercial use, and there’s no infringement on their part.
Later,
K
Kevin Strong said:
Joe, there are two “infringement” issues that might come up as I can see it:
First, if someone makes a 3D drawing of an existing commercial product, then publishes the resulting drawing to the web for others to print at will.
If that 3D drawing has enough modifications/variations to the original there won’t be an infringement
Second, someone takes a drawing from a site where it’s implicit that the plans are for non-commercial use only, and starts printing out commercial parts using the files.
Yes that is a no-no, but the Chinese don’t care. (http://www.rhb-grischun.ca/phpBB2/images/smiles/ani_wink.gif)
But if you’re creating the drawings from your own research (or imagination), then they’re your original works.
That research may include books/plans/general info from a variety of sources i.e. hardcopy, digital, photos etc. i.e. you don’t really have to go and measure the original object.
Some of you may recall the instance where Märklin sued PIKO because PIKO’s ICE was just like Märklin’s. It went to trial and the verdict was “both items are a model of the same original so they should be the same” ( I’m paraphrasing).
That was in a German court, the milage could be different in other jurisdictions. (http://www.rhb-grischun.ca/phpBB2/images/smiles/ani_wink.gif)(http://www.rhb-grischun.ca/phpBB2/images/smiles/ani_wink.gif)
My commentary regarding damaging the small manufacturer was directed at exactly what Kevin stated. He would not spend the time to create his own master for casting (therefore either making a small number of one offs, or purchasing the desired number from a dealer/distributor) but would definitely sit at his computer and generate his own in 3d. That takes business away from the small manufacturer.
3d printing I think is going to heavily blur the copyright/patent issue. If I sit and generate a complete model of say an air pump that has not been produced in 100 years using available print or other hard copy data, have I really infringed on anyones copyright. It was my time, my effort and my software that generated the model. If that is considered infringement, then Kemtron, Cal Scale, Precision Scale, etc. have/are all infringing with all their detail parts in all the various scales they produce in. Is there a difference between them and the individual modeler? Hartford Products produces several excellent D&RGW trucks, is he in infringement? Or are we talking a matter of dollars, who can spend the most money defending his position.
My tuppence.
I think a lot of the issue seems to be with the ease of ‘manufacture’ that things like 3D printing are allowing. Nobody would think I’m infringing if I took an AMS boxcar, and built an identical one out of styrene and metal. Yet, it seems that some people would think that me using a 3D printer to make an identical copy of, say, a figure from Richard K, would be ‘infringing’.
As we say in gubmint circle “Perception is everything!”
We got about a 1/2" of perception last night but the front has passed through so now it’s getting colder.
I fear this section.
Thank you Mr Benevolent Dictator!
“We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish”.
Andrew
Nice idea for a new section.
Bring it on!
As far as damaging the small manufacturer goes: No, this enables the small manufacturer.
I think the biggest issue about infringement is for example:
You purchase a set of windows from Grandt Line. You need more than what you purchased. So, you take the Grandt Line window, make up a 3D drawing and then print up your own windows.
The problem is, you used another Manufacture’s model to make models of your own. Grandt Line is out of the money you would have spent to purchase more windows and thus they suffer in loss of revenue.
On the other hand Bob brings up a great issue. Many of us will purchase a Grandt Line window. Take that as our guide and make more from scratch. Is that not the same thing as 3D printing them? Grandt Line still looses revenue.
I think 3D printing is here and manufactures will have to adjust to stay competitive. It is the nature of business.
Jake Smith said:
On the other hand Bob brings up a great issue. Many of us will purchase a Grandt Line window. Take that as our guide and make more from scratch. Is that not the same thing as 3D printing them? Grandt Line still looses revenue.
Or to carry your example even farther. You buy the Grant Line window, make your own mold, and cast copies for your personal use. As far as I’m aware it is perfectly legal to make a mold and casting of a commercial product for YOU OWN USE. If you sell a copy of this casting then you get in trouble with copy writing,etc. I see 3D printing similar to this situation as mold/casting.
But why make an exact copy of a commercial product? You need to make a 3D drawing in any case, modifying it just slighty would stand to reason.
3D scanning was mentioned. This year two printer outfits at SuperTrain in Calgary, one had a 3D scanner, the price of that was 2.5 times the price of the printer i.e. doing one’s own 3D drawings will apply a while longer.
Re: Infringement
Quite a few years ago, Fry’s Electronics built a brand new store here in Burbank, CA. Each store has a unique “theme” for the exterior/interior of the building. One is Alice in Wonderland here in Southern California. Many different themes used.
The Burbank store (close to the movie industry) had a Mars Invasion theme. Our own Chris Walas was the designer of that store. There is a huge “flying saucer” inside with a robot very similar to the robot (Gort) in the old scifi classic “The Day the Earth Stood Still”. I asked Chris how he was able to use a copyrighted character in his setting. He said all anyone has to do is change some features and sizes, just to give the idea of being the same and the “mind” of the person looking at that character fills in the blanks. All an illusion. AND STILL legal.
@ Craig. Here we go again…
Your assumption that the copyright law allows you to make reproductions of someones copyrighted work, just because you bought the original is Very Wrong. Even if it is for your own personal use. And is in fact illegal.
Making your own version, based on someone else’s is legal, BUT it can be a slippery slope, Ie; try marketing a Mickey mouse look-alike, and see if Disney’s lawyers don’t send you a letter.
The law allows the manufacturing of like common items without infringement on copyrights, in such generic items like, a chair ( the form and function of a common chair) but you can’t copy a “Designer Chair” ( something with unique form and function ). Making you’r own look alike of the Grant line window is OK, Making a mold of it is Illegal,
You can copy and make models of a standard boxcar, But you can’t buy someone else’s and make molds of it, even if it’s for you’r selfs use. Make your own original to the prototypes exact spects ( even if it’s the same as the one you bought) and make molds and reproduce as many as you want. Thats OK.
On to 3D printing, Buying an “Image or Form” to print from a supplier, Generally allows you to make as many copies and use for your own use, only. If you read the Licensing Agreement that you must agree to, allows for non commercial use of the “Image,” And generally restricts the generating of derivatives from the Copyrighted Image. Such as starting with the copyrighted image changing it a little and calling it your own, cause you slightly changed the original copyrighted image. That is Illegal.
Bottom line… Make your own original and it OK to copy. Steal someones else’s work and its illegal.
We. Won’t even get into the moral implications. Just because someone doesn’t sue you for copyright infringement, doesn’t make it legal to steal there work.
Dave Taylor said:
You can copy and make models of a standard boxcar, But you can’t buy someone else’s and make molds of it, even if it’s for you’r selfs use. Make your own original to the prototypes exact spects ( even if it’s the same as the one you bought) and make molds and reproduce as many as you want. Thats OK.
And if I use this standard boxcar to get the prototypes exact specs, is this legal or illegal ?
I should add to build my own
Dave, Making a model using the original as a starting point is OK, Now if you started to build full size boxcars that are an exact copy of Railboxs original design, You can expect to get a call from their lawyer.