FUCK YOU MAKERBOT.
http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20131125-907489.html
Honestly, this was inevitable. If they succeed(and they will), this will set a precedence case, which Stratasys can then use to nuke the hobbyist 3D printer companies one by one.
Goodbye 3D printing, we hardly knew ye.
Somebody should call them and have a friendly chat to let them know your opinion.
From the article:
CONTACT: Stratasys Inc.
Investor Contact :
Shane Glenn, + 1-952-294-3416 (US)
Shane.Glenn@stratasys.com
Media Contacts:
Aaron Masterson, +1-952-346-6258 (US)
AMasterson@webershandwick.com
Joe Hiemenz, +1-952-906-2726 (US)
joe.hiemenz@stratasys.com
Arita Mattsoff, + 972 - (0)74-745-4000 (IL)
arita@stratasys.com
There are too many of us. Legal bullying will work on most but it will not work on all. The very first second after I receive an infringement notice is the same second I start working on a strategic troll software patent.
Tell me more about MAKERBOT. I am really new to all this. Will actually get to see a 3D work in the next month, so gathering as much knowledge
as I can along the way. Have no idea what kind of printer it is going to be.
Thanks again
Actually, a district court decision isn’t binding precedent, so if they win in district court and Afinia rolls over and takes it Stratasys will have to go through the same full legal battle every time they go after someone under those patents. If Afinia appeals, and the federal circuit court of appeals upholds the original decision, it becomes binding precedent but only in that federal circuit.
That precedent is going to be highly persuasive in other circuits, though, and will simplify the process of Stratasys winning against anyone else they try to wield the same patents against. But it still means going to a full trial, because the persuasive precedent alone (probably) isn’t enough to convince a judge that the claim has already been decided as a matter of law.
…but yeah, it does seem quite inevitable that they’ll win this case (if Afinia doesn’t settle first) and any subsequent ones. The only real question is how much it’ll cost them to do so.
Well - I sent an email to those Stratasys folks. I don’t think I will knowingly be buying any of their products any time soon.
Thanks for clarifying that, @Stephen_Baird . Now, the question is whether we can do anything for Afinia that would at least mitigate the damages?
The patent infringed was issued in January this year and apparently is about slicing. If Stratasys wins, then it probably is so broad that it affects all GCode generating software. With all the tool path generating software around it hopefully will be some that will prove this patent as prior art, whatever it is about …
Please correct me if Im wrong but a priori no longer works in the revised first-to-patent system that went into effect last year. Thats why the Jan 2013 patent is so auspicious. It was only a matter of time before something like this happened. The next step is to see our OSH institutions get the C&D letters. I hope it doesnt come to that though.
@Thomas_Sanladerer Maybe this will be enough to convince them (meaning the Chinese company that actually makes their machine) to switch over/contribute to an opensource stack.
@Brian_Evans , that would not make sense. Prior art will always invalidate a patent, as long as it is a bona fide prior art that was available to the public before the patent. The first-to-patent system basically allows simultaneous inventors to get priority based on when the patent was filed, and not when the invention was first conceived.
The US went from first-to-invent to what is called first-inventor-to-file with the passage of the America Invents Act in 2011. But the effective date (for what we’re talking about here) is March 16, 2013, so whether the patent was filed for or granted in January of 2013 it’s still susceptible to a prior art attack.
Prior art can still be used to show the patent was invalid in a first-inventor-to-file system, but it’s a little different than in the older system… in any event, there’s also the prior-use defense where if a third party was using the now-patented technology for a year or more before the patent was filed for they can continue to do so without having to pay a licensing fee. So there ARE options, some of which might work…
Even if that weren’t true, though, there are decent arguments about the constitutionality of that change so a suitably well-funded defendant could try to invalidate that change entirely. But that would probably take getting something like the EFF or FSF involved, because we’re talking big expenses.
What are the patent numbers???
It would help if the specific patent numbers were included but looking at the patents that they hold, many claims do not seem to fit the requirement of being novel and probably would not hold up if contested but might require significant funds to overturn.
All the stratasys patents and applications can be found here: http://www.faqs.org/patents/assignee/stratasys-inc/
Likely candidate for the liquifier assembly infringement is http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090273122 One of the diagrams Figure 4 looks like an Alfina extruder drive.
This one will be the tool paths infringement (where they have patented something that is basically common sense, I came up with the idea independently so it can’t be that special)
http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20110070394
Can’t find any relevant direct references to temp control or porosity.
Incidentally, if you are just interested in building your own bot for your own purposes, these patents are a gold mine of great ideas to steal :D.
Where’s my surprised face? Oh, and that Bree Pettis guy who build his business on the wisdom of many to sell it to those that’ll sue to he hell out of anyone? Am I surprised?
Same thing happened to me when I had my business. I was making radio control airplanes that looked like a hydroplane boat. Spinmaster bought the idea from another guy after me and 5 other manufacturers were already selling them. It took me 2 months proving that their patents and copyrights were no good but with the attorney fees and loss of production during that time ended up costing me my business…I lost about $80,000 and I was just a small business working out of my garage.
Makerbot lost my favor when they raised their kit prices.
I truly hope that the EFF campaign for 3d printing prior art can turn out some useful leads. Please, support their efforts here with information, time, or money: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/join-effs-efforts-keep-3d-printing-open
And here: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/effs-fight-open-3d-printing-continues-askpatentscom