UK Copyright Extension On Designed Objects Is 'Direct Assault' On 3D Printing (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A recent extension of UK copyright for industrially manufactured artistic works represents "a direct assault on the 3D printing revolution," says Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge. The UK government last month extended copyright for designs from 25 years to the life of the designer plus 70 years. In practice, this is likely to mean a copyright term of over 100 years for furniture and other designed objects. Writing on the Private Internet Access site, Falkvinge says that the copyright extension will have important consequences for makers in the UK and EU: "This change means that people will be prohibited from using 3D printing and other maker technologies to manufacture such objects, and that for a full century." Falkvinge points out a crucial difference between the previous UK protection for designs, which was based on what are called "design rights" plus a short copyright term, and the situation now, which involves design rights and a much-longer copyright term. With design rights, "you're absolutely and one hundred percent free to make copies of it for your own use with your own tools and materials," Falkvinge writes. "When something is under copyright, you are not. Therefore, this move is a direct assault on the 3D printing revolution." "Moving furniture design from a [design right] to copyright law means that people can and will indeed be prosecuted for manufacturing their own furniture using their own tools," Falkvinge claims.

Comments

Dear all patents and patent holders.

[Lumpy]

You all can go Fuck yourselves. I will print whatever the hell I want in my home for my own uses. You can go and cry to your $1000 an hour psychiatrists as to why I am ruining your life.

Oh and to the MPAA... fuck yes I'll download a car! Doing it right now as a matter of fact as I want to print the Subaru Boxer engine model that is out there.

Re:Dear all patents and patent holders.

[JaredOfEuropa]

Copyright is an artificial construct that was thought up as a reasonable compromise between "information wants to be free", and monetary incentive for creators to create and publish their work. To extend copyright beyond the life of the creator is ridiculous. You can argue that extending copyright increases its value to whomever hopes to cash in on creative works, and will thus offer a better price to the creators, but there is absolutely no moral justification for creators to be able to levy a tax on the use of their works from beyond the grave, and take an advance on the proceeds. 10 years is a bit short, the author's life should be the absolute maximum. Something in between would be reasonable.

Re:Dear all patents and patent holders.

[alexo]

I disagree, 10 years is a bit long.

I will argue that doctors, firemen, first responders, etc do more important important work than "creators", yet none of them is paid one additional cent for past work.

Re:Dear all patents and patent holders.

[Anonymous Coward]

That is because their past work is not being replicated/reproduced and on sold.

Think of it this way, can the fireman say "I put out your neighbours house fire yesterday , so I don't need to put out yours today".

Also, the fireman is being paid in-between jobs, a writer can take years of research, writing and revision before the book gets published, yes some writers get an advance to see them through, but most don't. Musicians spend years honing their craft with little or no pay before they can make money from their skills.

I strenuously object to copyright after death, once dead that person can no longer create, so an incentive is worthless.
Corporations can not "create", it is done by people who work for the corporation, so corporations should not be able to hold copyright.

10 years is a reasonable length of time, it can take some years for new artists to build a following and thus create value for their early works, and they should be able to take advantage of that, but after 10 years.... no I don't think so. This is particularly true when we consider patents, they are created by people, give exclusive rights, but they are limited to 7 years.

As the world moves past the current system where by everyone works to "make a living" and we move to where everyone can just have what they "need" (as opposed to want), artists will come into their own as large masses of unemployed people will need to be entertained (at first) until such time as people "work" to add intellectual and cultural value to their lives. Go look at a university where retired professors still research, unpaid, there to satisfy their own intellectual needs and to pass on their knowledge to another generation. Yes some will choose to sit on the couch and vegetate, but the opportunity to explore the world etc etc etc and to add value will drive most people back into productivity.
The current system is geared towards "ownership" of rights, of property, of ideas, and using these rights for their sole benefit to make them "better" than those who have little property. It gives them power and privilege and wrestling that away from them will be the hardest step society will have to take before it can move on to the next level of civilisation.

Re:Dear all patents and patent holders.

[ShanghaiBill]

I will argue that doctors, firemen, first responders, etc do more important important work than "creators"

... and I would argue that they don't. A fireman is basically a commodity. One fireman can usually do anything another fireman can do. That is not true with artists.

yet none of them is paid one additional cent for past work.

Silly analogy. They are paid a fixed salary. Artists generally are not, and when they are, they usually sign away their creative rights.

Re:well, Browning died 70 years ago

[Anonymous Coward]

The incentive to do this is obvious.

Wealth is measured in dollars, but what it is a measure of is: influence over others. The more independent people are, the less influence the wealthy have over them. Therefore, the 3d printing revolution is a direct assault against the wealth of the wealthy.

They are just striking back.

When will doll manufacturers start suing mothers..

[ffkom]

... for producing 3-dimensional objects that look like their copyright protected products?

Re:Um, no.

[sgrover]

Imagine you have 30 year old desk of a nice design. A specific plastic piece of the desk (for argument's sake) breaks. That piece cannot be purchased because the desk went out of production 25 years ago and replacement parts are not available. So you go ahead and print the piece you need - either downloading the 3D model or creating a copy of it yourself. You have a fixed desk. A few days later you get a visit from the boys in blue for copyright infringement. Replace the desk with a car, toy, or some other widget. According to your argument - you should spend possibly thousands on getting a new thing, rather than spending $1 and a little time to maintain the thing. According to your argument the rest of the world should shame you into wasting your money. Me, I'd rather not shame anyone for doing anything reasonable like keeping their stuff maintained.

Repairs [Re:Um, no.]

[Tablizer]

If you need to repair something that's no longer manufactured and hard to find parts for, it's unrealistic to have to hire a lawyer to find and help negotiate "design usage rights". That's just plain dumb.

Or if it's a simple part with no patents on it, such as a gear, connector pin, etc. Ancient Greeks invented the (known) gear, for goodness sake.

There should be "repair reality" clause of some sort.
   

Re:More probable cause to break down your door

[fustakrakich]

Sorry, this is rent seeking, nothing more. Most people will make furniture that is comfortable for them. And now, if it just happens to like some commercial design, it is prohibited. It's bullshit. It's real intent is obvious, but it will be a long time before this wall gets knocked down.

It's too bad you would even consider this. It's like telling people they can't grow their own food.

UK Big Brother Shithole

[theshowmecanuck]

The UK is approaching max Orwell. To the point it is becoming a shithole. Go ahead separate from the EU. They still have laws that allow freedom of thought and innovation. The EU will do better. It was Britain that kept trying to push though American style copyright laws.

Yes, things are changing

[WolfgangVL]

Its about fucking time.

Look crybaby, the only reason you had been able to claim your "design" warranted specific amounts of money was because other people had been willing to pay for it. This is changing. You want to keep getting paid? Finish the job and manufacture it. Or sell it as a kit. Otherwise, if I can make something just as good myself, I will, and then I'll make another and sell it to my neighbor. I don't care how bent out of shape you get over it when I do. I don't care a rats ass if its similar in design to the one you drafted up on a piece of paper. I don't give fuck-all about your feeling on the matter. If it put sawdust on my shop floor, or used some of my filament, its mine. If my 2 hands built it and it happens looks like some catalog shit, well it must be a great catalog, but that makes my creation no less mine.

I'm looking forward to the slashdot stories regarding the super-legit lawsuits brought against those legions of dishonest craftsmen, by the fine and upstanding companies that will soon control the manufacturing schematics and plans for everything.

Now if you will excuse me, my patent for "flat writing surface on 4 legs" just came back,and my copyright application was just approved for my new song, I call it "whistle'n noises" Now all I need to to is get my trusty lawyer to work extracting money from you guys for hand-writing letters (totes my idea btw) or whistling some noises.

Re:well, Browning died 70 years ago

[jenningsthecat]

Poor people don't have the slightest notion how to draft trade policies that won't ruin the economy, let alone how to tell credible science from media-fluff.

In some African countries, very poor villagers, when given micro-loans, establish businesses that lead to thriving micro-economies. And they do so with a lack of other resources and supports that might well leave you flat-ass broke and begging for handouts if you were in the same situation. Poor != stupid, lazy, ignorant, etc. As for 'credible science', many people the world over who live at the sharp end of existence have been blowing the trumpet of global warming for decades. It took organized science a while to catch up with them.

And their best attempts at administering justice would be indistinguishable from barbarism.

If you're going to put up a straw man, you should first acquire some straw.. Your 'argument' doesn't have even that, never mind the string to hold it together and give it shape.

Re:well, Browning died 70 years ago

[Archangel Michael]

The greatest wealth creator is Liberty. It frees men to pursue the talents and skills they have unrestricted by tyrant's rules. Human Capital is the greatest wealth creator, and economic wealth is just a reflection of that. If you want to free the economic capital from the wealthy, free the human capital from the rules and regulations and taxes the stifle human capital. The wealthy cannot contain human capital of others in a free and open economic system.