Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Stratasys sues Afinia

Posted by Have Blue 
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 27, 2013 01:34PM
Quote
MattMoses
[*] A self replicating 3D printer will never be made.
[*] Unless it's made by an art student who thinks it would be funny.
[/list]

Haha, that's fun!

That makes me thing, then why we are here? then why Reprap exists?

Eventually one will be made. Not by one person, or a team, but by the whole community in small steps. Someone will improve previous work and then perhaps will start a company, but then some other guy will continue where the first guy left and so on, until one day, the machine is replicable. Perhaps, as humans, we are too selfish to make one by ourselves alone, but those little steps (many times motivated by the potencial of money making) can lead to the true REPRAP.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 27, 2013 05:16PM
Quote
bobc

That is no longer true, since first to file came in. The key thing about prior art is that it must be "known within the trade", they won't be googling for open source on the web.

I'm afraid that a lot of people have ideas about the patent system which are quite unlike how it is actually applied, which perhaps leads them to think the patent system is fair, in practice it is heavily skewed to a land grab by large corporates. Patent offices get paid by patent fees, they have little interest in refusing patents however obvious. If there is a dispute, they let the corporate lawyers fight it out, they don't care who wins.

Bob your comments on the issue are incorrect and misleading. First to file doesn't trump prior art. first to file is invoked when two persons try to patent the same idea. The first one that files gets precedence over the patent not necessarily who thought of it or used it first. Prior art still exists and can be (and is) used as a defense in an infringement suit.

The DMCA has nothing to do with a patent infringement cases. Period. A cease and desist has no binding legal authority. In many cases no cease and desist letters are sent prior to litigation. You are also assuming what a host would or wouldn't do. Your posts are how threads like this create hysteria and misinformation. Rather than spreading FUD I think a more prudent approach is to wait and see what will happen. These types of issues are complex and can take several years to resolve.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 27, 2013 05:34PM
Quote
Have Blue

Beta lost to VHS primarily due to the much longer recording length available on VHS - the lower price was nice, but being able to pack more shows onto a tape is what really tipped the scales in the market.

How many of us were around during the video format wars?.....smoking smiley It was a combination of cost, length of play, availability and the fact that porn was driving the content segment of the industry were why VHS became the dominant format. There was hardly any content available for quite a while (compared to now) so it was up to you to record what you wanted to watch. Movies on tape didn't come until later. At the time the motion picture industry was fighting VCR technology tooth and nail with the initial consumer apps being home movies, taping TV and porn.
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 27, 2013 09:14PM
Quote
Christopher Barnatt on November 27th, 2013 at 12:28 pm said:
Excellent article. It is interesting how Stratasys are now trying to “defend” their intellectual property in terms of 3D printing hardware, while on the Makerbot.com website — in the FAQ for their Digitizer 3D scanner ( [s3.amazonaws.com] ) — they very much side-step intellectual property issues with a throw-away comment: To cite the FAQ:

===
[Q] What about intellectual property and copyrights? Does scanning something violate those?

[A] The MakerBot Digitizer is a new technology in a new frontier. If you’re interested in reading more about how copyright and other IP topics, check out writings from the public interest group Public Knowledge.
===

The MakerBot Digitizer is apparently all about “sharing” — scanning everything in the world and uploading the scans for everybody to have free access to on Thingiverse.com (which MakerBot set up and which Stratasys hence now own). Quite how this kind of pioneering attitude to intellectual property can square with a legal move that can sadly only slow the development of 3D printing is — to me at least — very unclear. Revolutions need enthusiasts as well as corporate pioneers, and Stratasys may actually find that their strategy here backfires if the grass roots community starts to boycott MakerBots and/or Thingiverse.
[makezine.com]


3D Printing: The Business Opportunities
ExplainingTheFuture, Christopher Barnatt
[www.youtube.com]
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 27, 2013 09:20PM
I deleted most of my CAD data files on Thingiverse.
I'll keep a few on there so I can monitor the site.

We need a truly Open Source repository.

I would like to see RepRap get behind one site (or be that site), and make it thee place to go to share CAD data files.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 27, 2013 09:23PM

Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 12:28AM
If you don't think this is a big deal, you're an idiot.


"sounding like a dick" -- Sublime.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 01:18AM
does stratasys hold uk patents? does their vice grip only apply to US? surely activity like this will push 3d printing development out of the states and into europe and china.
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 01:33AM
US patents are respected in countries that are part of the WTO.

The TRIPS Agreement, which came into effect on 1 January 1995,
is to date the most comprehensive multilateral agreement on intellectual property.
[www.wto.org]
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 06:33AM
Quote
iquizzle
...

Afinia is selling closed source, fully built printers. Honestly, it's a pretty far cry from what the average reprap user is using. I don't think there's any reason for all the panic here.

I agree here, reprap means open source.
Most of the community members will not be affected, it seems that the patent owners, 3D Systems, Stratasys only intervene if companies come up with closed source 'direct manufacturing' developments.

3D Systems-> FormLabs
Stratasys-> Afinia

I don't get the 'hysteria' in the community: A closed source company is going after a closed source company


MANUPOOL
01577 42 20000
- people are places -
MANUPOOL® - Bausätze - Prototypen - Elektronik.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 06:40AM
@Fim Fischer

Sure, they have gone for closed source this time, but who is saying they are only after closed source sellers? That has nothing to do with their decision. If you start selling 3D printers and they notice you're becoming a strong competitor, they will take action, no matter open or closed source. They don't care.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 06:41AM
Quote
bobc
If you don't think this is a big deal, you're an idiot.

confused smiley
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 06:43AM
yeah i think ur right, stratasys is just acting as top dog. knocking down younger dogs that are getting big enough to challenge for market dominance. reprap is safe for now, until its machines get way more advanced and effective than makerbot smiling smiley which is bound to happen i think because the community can move onto new ideas quicker without having to worry about shifting a backlog of mass-manufactured stock. cant wait for makerbot3.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 07:12AM
Quote
Guizmo
@Fim Fischer

Sure, they have gone for closed source this time, but who is saying they are only after closed source sellers?

They are going after closed source developers who are stepping on their future market/distribution network,
that is what i see.

Quote
Guizmo
If you start selling 3D printers and they notice you're becoming a strong competitor, they will take action, no matter open or closed source. They don't care.

Well, i don't know if they would or if they care.
But i am relaxed anyway, i am 'selling' diy- education, i don't intend to sell '3D printers'.


MANUPOOL
01577 42 20000
- people are places -
MANUPOOL® - Bausätze - Prototypen - Elektronik.
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 07:32AM
Why Patents Won't Kill 3D-Printing Innovation (Op-Ed)
Melba Kurman, author, and Hod Lipson, Cornell University associate professor in mechanical and aerospace engineering,
Fab@Home (created by Evan Malone and this article's co-author Hod Lipson
[www.livescience.com]

I would like to see what these two authors have to say about Stratasys suit.
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 05:23PM
Disclaimer: This post does not constitute legal advice. I am not an attorney. I do not have expertise in these matters.



I reread this patent and got a few more ideas.

Method for controlled porosity three-dimensional modeling
US 5653925

Publication date Aug 5, 1997
Filing date Sep 26, 1995
Priority date Sep 26, 1995
[www.google.com]

What is claimed is:
1. A method of making a three-dimensional article by the deposition of solidifiable material onto a receiving surface,
with the article having a predetermined porosity comprising that fractional portion of the article that is devoid of such material, comprising the steps of:
Work around: Use a random number generator to select porosity. Taken further you could do this to each slice.

adjusting the rate of dispensing of the material to provide a predetermined porosity in the article thus formed.
Work around: Use a fixed rate of dispensing of the material.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/28/2013 05:23PM by A2.
Attachments:
open | download - ScreenHunter_236 Nov. 28 20.12.jpg (73 KB)
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 05:27PM
Disclaimer: This post does not constitute legal advice. I am not an attorney. I do not have expertise in these matters.

I recall that there is/was a patent law in which the patent holder after discovering a violation of their patent can wait no longer than 6 or 7 years? before they can file a suit.

If after 6 or 7 years? the patent holder does not take action against copy cats they loose their right to bring a suit.

If this is the case, then Stratasys may have lost their right to bring a suit?

Has anyone heard of this before?
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 05:32PM
the easiest way around the infill patent problem is to simply remove the option and make the model solid by default, then make it the responsibility of the modeler to incorporate in the model an internal structure which mimics an infill density, and that can be achieved with even a simple open-scad script... the person writing slicing software can then be free of potential litigation and the companies selling 3d printers no longer breech the patent... at least in that respect




-=( blog )=- -=( thingiverse )=- -=( 3Dindustries )=- -=( Aluhotend - mostly metal hotend)=-



Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 05:33PM
Quote
A2
Disclaimer: This post does not constitute legal advice. I am not an attorney. I do not have expertise in these matters.

I recall that there is/was a patent law in which the patent holder after discovering a violation of their patent can wait no longer than 6 or 7 years? before they can file a suit.

If after 6 or 7 years? the patent holder does not take action against copy cats they loose their right to bring a suit.

If this is the case, then Stratasys may have lost their right to bring a suit?

Has anyone heard of this before?


you would have to dig into the legislation of the individual country,




-=( blog )=- -=( thingiverse )=- -=( 3Dindustries )=- -=( Aluhotend - mostly metal hotend)=-



A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 05:42PM
Disclaimer: This post does not constitute legal advice. I am not an attorney. I do not have expertise in these matters.

Great suggestion!

Quote
thejollygrimreaper
...make it the responsibility of the modeler to incorporate in the model an internal structure which mimics an infill density,
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 07:20PM
Disclaimer: This post does not constitute legal advice. I am not an attorney. I do not have expertise in these matters.


Bre Pettis

"It makes me sad when I see things that are just the same technology; you aren’t passing the technology forward."

"(people were) taking our technology we had spent a lot of time developing.
They weren’t innovating."

“Until we merged with Stratasys, we spent a lot of our efforts … respecting their IP”

"we really set ourselves up to get beaten up when we made that shift."

[gigaom.com]

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/28/2013 07:21PM by A2.
Attachments:
open | download - ScreenHunter_238 Nov. 28 22.12.jpg (13.3 KB)
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 28, 2013 08:59PM
did makerbot not use a slicer that had "porous infill" and dont they also use a heated bed and build chamber.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 12:45AM
Quote
Fim Fischer
[[quote=Guizmo]
If you start selling 3D printers and they notice you're becoming a strong competitor, they will take action, no matter open or closed source. They don't care.
Well, i don't know if they would or if they care.
But i am relaxed anyway, i am 'selling' diy- education, i don't intend to sell '3D printers'.

According to the patents mentioned, they could sue hotend producers and heated bed manufacturers, as well as slicing software.
If they continue this path, they surely can seriously hurt the reprap community. True, the software will still be available somehow, but active development may discontinue if the developer could be sued for patent infringement.

We should keep in mind that the UP! is neither new nor really different from most Repraps.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2013 01:09AM by Bantha.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 01:05AM
@A2:

IANAL, too.

From what I understand, the main problem cannot be solved by a workaround. The patent they used against the heated bed is so broad that they could even sue you if you heat the room in which the printer is located - a patent that broad should have never been granted, IMHO. The patent about the infill isn't really an invention as well, since you are bound to have empty spaces when you're doing an FDM print. It happens automatically when you don't push enough material through your nozzle, it's not an "invention", again IMHO.

The main problem is, when Stratasys sues you, you will have to defend yourself in court if you want to resist. This means you have to invest a lot of time and money. Even if you use a workaround, Statasys can still sue you. And even if you use workarounds, there is no guarantee that you win.
A2
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 02:15AM
Disclaimer: This post does not constitute legal advice. I am not an attorney. I do not have expertise in these matters.

As to any of the work arounds being effective you would have to consult your attorney.
I'm not an expert, I'm still struggling to learn the basics of 3D printers, and printing.

My understanding is that you have to have a work around for every independent, and dependent claim.
So by utilizing only one work around you are still infringing upon Stratasys I.P.

If I wasn't told that patent 5,866,058 was a heated bed, I wouldn't have know it from reading the patent,
the description in the claims are too vague, broad, and confusing for me to interpret.

As to the infill, Mr. Lane made an interesting observation of how pottery objects utilize infill to reduce the mass,
is this prior art?, if it is it's an ancient technique. Clay is a plastic, it's commonly extruded,
it goes through a glass transition upon hardening, and can require hollow infill.


Quote
Ryan Lane on November 28th, 2013 at 4:08 pm said:
Maybe I’m wrong here, but I swear I learned in a pottery class ages ago that instead of a solid block of clay it was better to lay a grid of materials with holes for the air to expand so that firing was easier. Is that a common technique? If so that would would be prior art on infill. On top of that I’m pretty sure that people working with glass have understood that you need to keep it hot. It doesn’t seem like you should be able to patent common sense. And hidden seam? I mean really. This has been part of knitting, basket weaving, to any number of other long standing traditional art forms. It isn’t special just because it’s plastic.
[makezine.com]
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 05:26AM
How many years does a patent "last" before it expires?

Tried to get information here: http://www.uspto.gov/inventors/patents.jsp
At the most 17 years or possibly 14 years, can't tell since I'm not familiar with US patents.

Just wait with arms crossed until the expiration day for each patent and then continue as before?
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 05:42AM
some of the stratasys patent expire 2021
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 06:33AM
i believe the patents expire 17 years after the submission date, not completely sure though.

also if they do end up suing and buying up these companies, they will have a monopoly on 3d printing, which is a crime in the united states.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2013 06:38AM by aduy.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 07:33AM
Quote
aduy
i believe the patents expire 17 years after the submission date, not completely sure though.

also if they do end up suing and buying up these companies, they will have a monopoly on 3d printing, which is a crime in the united states.

Not necesarily. In theory you could license their technology. But in fact, that is just what a patent does: allows the holder to have a temporal monopoly. ¿Good, bad? that is up to every one of us.
Re: Stratasys sues Afinia
November 29, 2013 10:03AM
In terms of a thriving community driven technology like 3d printing they should be a bit more careful about how general these patents are. its like patenting the genome. BAD for humankind. thats my f-ing genome. I have the god given right to build 3d printers smiling smiley
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login