Any thoughts on this. It seems pretty obvious as a development once you get into it and there doesn’t seem to be much difference between the new patent and the expired patent. Layer adhesion is the big Achilles heel of 3D printing after all.

  • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 days ago

    I would say we should just implement it in open source software, anonymously, and let them kick rocks.

    If they want to press the issue they can go after whoever-it-is for their “slice” of the infringing revenue generated, which is zero dollars and zero cents. If they want to shut down a project we can just pack it up and pop up elsewhere under a new one. Fuck 'em.

    It is obviously already possible on a technical level, at least with varying degrees of ease, using modifications to existing tools. Sefan from CNC Kitchen posted a video a while ago where he managed to pull off and test several prints using brick layered perimeters.

    • Marvelicious@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Yeah, honestly that was at least partially my thought process posting this. I see someone else posted the same video and got a bit more traction as well, which is great: the more eyes on this, the more likely someone chooses to develop it. If someone develops a fork or plugin for various open source slicers, it’s usefulness should quickly become obvious and someone with deeper pockets will wind up going after the BS patent. Even as little as a 10% improvement in layer adhesion, if it’s reliable and consistent, is a significant upgrade. The old saying about a chain only being as strong as the weakest link comes to mind and layer adhesion is the weakest link in 3d printing.

  • bluewing@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 days ago

    Not an IP lawyer, (those people are EXPENSIVE), It’s perhaps less about the idea than it is about the process to get there. And yes the patent office does make mistakes at times. It’s just expensive and hard to correct those mistakes because it generally takes a judge to do so. And I’m willing to bet this patent is valid in the EU also due reciprocity agreements and trade deals. It would take an EU judge to invalidate the patent, which would cost as much as doing so in the US.

    One thing that I have learned over the years is that no patent is actually really valid until a judge bangs a gavel and says yea or nay to the patent, (I’ve held a couple). Until then, it pretty much just a piece of ass-wipe paper you can wavy around and hopefully scare off others that don’t have the money or want to spend the money to challenge the patent.