Slashdot Mirror
UC Berkeley Group Working On Creating Inexpensive 3-D Printer Materials
phrackthat writes "A UC Berkeley group, in a bid to drive down the costs of 3-D printing, has been focusing on more natural materials such as salt, wood, ceramics and concrete (the last two, while not naturally occurring, are made of naturally occurring components). The use of these materials create new avenues for architecture, such as printing buildings. Professor Ronald Rael, the head of the project, stated that these materials and the designs they enable will require new IP protections — 'This is going to require some IP protection for designs, so if you design architecture in the computer, you're protected, just as music and movies are.' I wonder if he's ever heard of design patents?"
Do design patents apply when you build something yourself for yourself?
...has been focusing on more natural materials...
As opposed to what? More metaphysical materials?
Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
the designs are already covered by copyright and patents..
also, it seems they're using just cheaper powders for a powder-binder type of printer. the thing the guy is hugging is printed in parts, it looks like.
but what's the point in cheap materials, if these guys are out to patent them? it's not like the commercial powders are THAT expensive to manufacture. they just have a fabulous markup due to ip protection.
the print a house directly with a moving concrete laying head projects seem a bit interesting - a lot interesting.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
When it comes to the economics, Professor Rael, like so many others, exhibits a severe lack of imagination.
That's cheap and plentiful...
On y va, qui mal y pense!
People have been doing 3D printing using ceramics and cement for a few years now. Why is this suddenly new again? Entire buildings have been constructed this way using giant printing machines no less. Don't the people at Berkeley or Tech News know how to use Google yet?
"Does this mean people can download your building and print it?" he said. "This is going to require some IP protection for designs, so if you design architecture in the computer, you're protected, just as music and movies are."
Designs are already protected, as they are a work. It's no different than the 3D models we already deal with in the game industry. A person spent a lot of time creating the files, and copyright law already includes such creative work.
In fact if you want to, you can license your architecture designs. If you want to share them with everyone, you can use one of the Creative Commons license. That way nobody can (legally) take your name off it, but it can otherwise be shared freely.
Concrete and ceramic guns! Look out everyone!
He takes natural materials and turns them into various man-made objects. Rather than taking man-made materials and turning them into man-made objects.
Sounds to me he's making things worse, not better.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Professor Ronald Rael, the head of the project, stated that these materials and the designs they enable will require new IP protections — 'This is going to require some IP protection for designs, so if you design architecture in the computer, you're protected, just as music and movies are.'
That's putting the cart before the horse.......you haven't even built your product yet, and you're worried, not about what your users will do with it, but how they will legally protect what they do with it. Two steps ahead (not to mention there's already protection).
Spending too much time worrying about problems that don't exist yet is one of the many ways you can sink a startup. It's similar to sitting there dreaming, "what will you do with all your money when we're rich?"
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Earth, Air, Fire and Water.
I thought right now plastic which is made from naturally occurring oil was the standard material for 3d printing?
Instead of this natural BS, just come out and say renewable or less resource constrained or something.
Oil isn't "naturally occurring"? Say what now?
3D printing in ceramics, concrete, and wood composites have been around longer than consumer 3D printers. If this wasn't Berkeley, it wouldn't be getting any press coverage.
Design patents cover the *aesthetic* aspects of a design. We're talking here about functionality, and that is protected by utility patents.
I have deposits of plastic in my backyard, it naturally occurred.
People have been 3-D printing buildings from natural materials available on site for thousands of years. Somehow they didn't need new IP protections. Other species have been doing it even longer.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Now that we have 3D-printers that print guns, another challenge to us all: print a 3D-printer.
thinking outside the 3d printer box, ever since viewing the endless suburbs in the texas towns I have envisioned something substantially bigger than the vehicle that transports the space shuttle to the launch pad, advancing through the countryside, ingesting woods, grasslands, soil, and rock, and out the other end comes a suburban street with driveways and houses in move-in-ready state. Materiel for plumbing and electricity might have to be transported into the monster.
For Moore, OK, the thing could recycle the rubble back into homes, adding storm shelters of course.
I wish they'd work on inexpensive laser sintering.
Science is trying to pump out new technologies faster than governments can ban them or corporations can lock them up with patents.
This is really starting to get interesting...
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
Now that would sting!
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
The more 3D printers land in the hands of the unwashed, the more chance some psycho is going to make a nice array of guns. We don't need to ban this technology, but have proper software and materials accounting so we don't have another Briarwood or Sandy Hook, which WILL happen unless proper regulations are permitted (like joining the rest of the world with firearms belonging to the police and military, and not any psycho loon on the streets who is able to lie well enough to pass a background check.)
This can be addressed very simply -- A DRM solution on 3D printers, a felony for it being tampered with, and a felony for possession of 3D printers just like it is to own guns with scratched out serial numbers, or sawed off shotguns.
This has been done before. Try copying a Euro or dollar on a color copier, and the device will refuse to copy at best, at worst, phone home about the counterfeit attempt. It is trivial to check hashes for 3D files and block them, or heuristics for items like barrels, so BATF can be aware of another potential mass murderer getting ready for action.
I know I'll be called a troll, but someone has to state this, so we don't have another mass grave of elementary school students, and nothing but lip service given to removing them off the streets. Hell, even Venezuela enacted a complete gun ban, which caused the crime in their cities to be 1/10 of what it is before the weapons were removed from the citizenry.
Professor Ronald Rael, the head of the project, stated that these materials and the designs they enable will require new IP protections — 'This is going to require some IP protection for designs, so if you design architecture in the computer, you're protected, just as music and movies are.'
Isn't this the same complication that been hashed back and forth for source code on software for years now? Source code is the "design" or the instructions on how to build....the executable is created by automated builder called "compilers" and such....not a new problem just because it involves a 3D printer....
AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM