Another attempt to copycat and even trademark stolen ideas might hit kickstarter the next days.
They even copied one of the very first slide on wedge designs.
missing/deleted image from Google+
Sometimes I do question the point of patents.
Was the magnetic tool changer patented?
Looks like the project is based out of South Korea, based on the language options: http://opencreators.com/
No, the tool changer work is CC BY-NC-SA 3.0. Anyway, I expected someone doing this sooner or later. But I don’t like this kind of dishonesty.
“minute wobble”… wht?
Dude. You can’t put a CC license on a functional design. Doesn’t mean anything. Creative Commons licensing only applies to valid copyrights, and copyrights only apply to original creative works. Functional designs can only be protected by patents.
Don’t want to start a discussion about threshold of originality here. That’s not the point, it’s about a honest or dishonest attitude when copying ideas and trying to monetize them.
@Markus_Seidt Originality has nothing to do with it, it’s about FUNCTION versus ARTWORK. Art is copyrightable, functional mechanisms are not. CC licenses DO NOT APPLY to functional mechanisms, ever. Doesn’t matter if it’s the most creative and original functional design in history, it’s not protected by copyright. If it’s not protected by copyright, CC licensing is null and void.
CC license applies:
- An original logo embedded in a 3d model of a widget
- Software code and structure of that code
- Artwork
- Written word
- Recorded music
- PCB silkscreens and hand-routed circuits
CC license does not apply:
- A 3d model of a widget that doesn’t have any artwork on it
- A brilliant new mechanism or novel arrangement of parts
- A process for doing something useful
- A circuit schematic
I would be more interested in hearing their response to:
- Obvious infringement of the Makerbot Automated Build Plate patent
- How they’re doing a Kickstarter campaign as a non-US business (this violates the KS terms of service)
Does it infringe the automated build plate patent? It is a very different solution, in which the glass platform goes off with the print. They also seem to have solved the problem of removing those prints from the glass, in that you can let a few prints go by, then it will start dropping the panes of glass of the edge of the table, thereby separating (most of) the glass from the print.
BTW, WRT licensing, creative commons licenses are not enforceable for functional objects, but they’re currently about as good as we can get in terms of allowing a designer to make their intentions known, even if there’s nothing (other than maybe some social pressure) preventing others from violating those intentions.
@Whosa_whatsis there are three ABP patents, one of them has a claim for moving build plates in and out of the build area.
@Ryan_Carlyle kickstarter has been doing non-US stuff for years already. Not every country is accepted yet. https://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/creator+questions#faq_41823
US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Mexico
A patent on the “picking up tool heads” would be the best waste of money you can do. Thanks to the obvious prior art.
It is quite flattering that they used our Ultimaker 2+ feeder on this machine 
FWIW, Opencreators is a korean outfit. I don’t see either Korea on that list.
+Markus Seidt I totally agree about the point of honesty or dishonesty when copying and trying to moneitze upon others work. It is even worse if the copier then goes on to conduct a sustained and targeted campaign toward the original creator to damage and tarnish original creators business and reputation, for their own monetary gain which would be very gutter-like behaviour.