Intellectual property of 3Dprinting models
One of the most popular and most printed models, without taking the throne from the well-known benchy, is the baby groot model. A great model that is perfect with filaments that imitate wood. This model was controversial a while ago due to a disney claim that forced the platform to withdraw the model. At that time it had more than 750,000 downloads.
Seeing the large number of models for downloads that exist using trademark licenses today in the blog we are going to talk about the intellectual property of 3D printing models.
Why are companies beginning to declare their intellectual rights?
When the boom of 3D printing began, its domestic use was very low. In many websites we can find merchandising of the most famous franchises on the planet and in many cases without being licensed. Today with an average of 500,000 3D printers installed in homes last year and more than 7 million models ready to print in thingiverse, large companies have begun to focus on the amateur consumption of 3D printing.
Before it was more difficult to pirate merchandising, but with the cheapening of the 3D printing, the wide access to materials, the scanners of low cost and millions of users all over the world sharing their designs online no longer cost anything to have objects of any franchise.
It's not just Disney, HBO and other companies have requested the withdrawal of models uploaded to the network.
Companies with another point of view
Not all companies react in the same way. We have examples like Universal Studios, or CAPCOM that collaborate with different printing services to offer 3D printed merchandising to their clients.
Normally these companies do not share the models, if not they sell you the final piece personalized for each user.
Who do 3D models belong to?
To know if a model for 3D printing is legitimate, we must know to whom the rights of the element that we are going to reproduce belong.
In thingiverse a Creative Commons license is used, which allows users to share their creations with the community so that others can print or modify it at their whim, always giving credit to the original author. This does not mean that the author loses the right to its creation and in the license itself we can specify if the model can be used for commercial purposes or not.
The case of the "Sad Face!" Model is well known. of thingiverse that uncovered the case of people who were selling 3D printed pieces on eBay skipping everything the Creative Commons license implies. They were also using the same photos that the designer went up to Thingiverse to present his model. Little could be done since in the United States to decide on infringements of intellectual right the license that it sends is the copyright.
Finally, thanks to the involvement of the community and of the MakerBot itself, these articles have been discontinued. EBay stores had items from many designers and even items that did infringe copyright. This I finish giving place to that portals like Myminifactory finished implanting systems to detect the illegitimate practices that will be realized on the models of the users of their platform.
The case of using property of a brand is very different. Although the model you have created is the result of your work and you have spent hours designing it, if the image belongs to any company you can demand that it be removed from the network as this can harm your economic interests.
The conclusion of all this is that when designing and uploading models to the Internet, we have to take into account if we are violating the intellectual property of a brand, because they can demand its withdrawal. Luckily there are few cases that have occurred for the moment.
Greetings and see you printing.
Greetings and see you printing
Join us on our social networks for more articles like this!