Tom is about to do his build

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

Dui, I was I could speak so freely online. Best I can do is vent to anyone that will listen in person.

@migger

If Prusa ever contacts you about it, just take it from there.

@thesfreader

This.

Because he part of a successful company it is okay to not follow the license, or just switch it to GPL? I am willing to switch it but I have to look into it further and verify a few things, especially cross contamination. If any parts co-exist GPL pertains to all projects with GPL parts. Same reason we are serving some pictures in the new instructions from my server instead of github. There needs to be clear separation. This is why I took it down. There might be one part I used in both, but it was made for the MPCNC first.

@paulc020

What is important with all these licences is that members of the community show respect for them.

That is what happened with the MP3DP, under my own admission I feel it is a derivative. I have half designs and sketches of all kinds of printers that one is clearly a prusa/mendel. In trying to respect the license, enforceable or not, It has to be GPL.

 

@geneb

In order to run afoul of the GPL, you’d have to start your part design process based on an STL you imported into your CAD software.

That was Tom’s point exactly. I don’t feel that is in the spirit of the non-enforceable licenses we use. I made a copy, every single part was 100% from scratch (like Tom said) and unique, not even compatible in any way. If you sat them side by side and told a person new to 3D printing they were both Prusa’s I am sure they would feel that way, if you told them it was not they would call it a copy. I did copy it, in homage, but I did not honor the license. I need to figure that part out.

@jamesfisherabc

It might be a good idea to make a video explaining your side. The secret of a video is it humanizes you and lets people connect and understand.

Unfortunately Video is not my forte at best would be a blog post, but that keeps ending up looking bad. I can’t present my side without getting into it again. Starting it fresh, new ammo for the mob.

 

I can put them back up GPL but if anyone starts asking for files and all that I am not devoting any time to it and will just take it down. I designed that first one in a version of solidworks I don’t own any more. Putting up my files will help next to no one. Someone will then ask for compatible files, step or something, and I will have to convert all the files for both projects. Why do I have to do that, because GPL says you can not hide the source in any way. Using outdated proprietary software could be perceived as hiding the files. I guess I should I did agree to that license by copying the design. All this because some person wanted to make a prusa derivative with a belted Z axis, and wanted my files to do it. They still felt 100% that were making a “prusa” using my files.

[heath]

If anything, taking it down and while you reconsider if it violates the license shows you have integrity. You didn’t publicly attack anyone, pitch a fit over it, and make a video of you dismantling the printers out of spite. I wish I had downloaded the files before you took them down, but I think you made the right call to take them down and consider all of the implications.

[heath]

I see some of the same arguments that were used to defend Tom are now being used here to defend Ryan. While the cases are completely different, and I do not believe Ryan’s parts are “derivative” and I do believe Tom’s part was, the muddy and subjective (absent an actual legal battle) nature of it meant that Ryan taking the MP3DP down and re-examine the licensing was the ideologically consistent action to take.

[makermechanic (George M)]

The blurb on this site about the MP3DP says it’s your take on a prusa i3. If that means you have to make the license match then maybe you should. Then in the future if you’d rather not update the project further because it isn’t worth the time then don’t. It is kinda shitty for someone to try and nail you on a license because they want your parts though.

[frosty]

There are two things going on here that are related but separate: Doing what is legal and being a mensch.

As far as what is legal: Copyright doesn’t cover useful objects. Objects “inspired by”, “an homage to”, and “visually similar to” are not real legal categories so all arguments using them have zero legal standing.

Now, as should be obvious to everyone, not everything that is legal is ethical so “community standards”, “respect”, “reciprocity”, etc. step in to help fill the gap and that is largely where this discussion is now (since, as stated above copyright has nothing to do with it in a strictly legal sense).

The most important consideration now is what is the intent of the designer. In the case of Prusa, it is pretty clear he doesn’t care a whit about people making “derivative works” (in the conceptual, not legal, sense) so respecting his intent is pretty easy (the few narrow limitations re: GPL and his STLs hare already been mentioned and don’t enter into this). In the case or Ryan’s design his intent was that people respect the spirit of NC-SA. Very clearly Tom had/has no interest in doing this so even if he is legally right I think he runs very much afoul of the community standards that I would like to see applied.

I appreciate Ryan’s desire to be consistent in his ethics here, but if you make your conscience the slave of everyone on the internet with a keyboard and an opinion you are destined to go mad.

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

Maybe this will give you guys some insight into my stance. When I was a paid engineer I was pretty good at basic CAD, but not some sort of genius. The reason using the files to me is BS is I never would anyway. I do everything in my power not to use others CAD. I look at references and get critical dimensions, books for specific numbers of things (hole diameters, rib ratios). Using someone else CAD file sucks, it is only done with extremely minor edits or to ensure things like preexisting molds do not have to get changed. I made the LR in a a day or two and that included sketching it first, then printing parts. I can copy anything by eye, quickly, much more quickly than referencing another file. Sometimes editing a file is easy and works but typically it does not. Something like the Prusa mk3 has been revised to print well/fast, that just makes it easier. I can see why every single choice was made. Something like a sculpture and I would never ever be able to replicate it in months. A well engineered part lacking many artistic choices is an extremely basic part no matter how complicated it looks. Using a file or drawings as a qualifier is brutal to me as I never use them anyway. So saying I didn’t copy it is simply not true.

The prusa printers seem to be released as open SCAD files, proving I have not touched them as that is Greek to me, but I 100% have always said it is a derivative. If a sculpture copies the David, he is doing it by eye, from scratch, is it not a copy? Even if it looks completely different he intended to copy it, so it is a form of a copy, a derivative. In my eyes.

I am not upset or getting defensive, I think we are making progress. We are narrowing down this grey area chipping away at it from both sides now. MPCNC, MP3DP.

So I guess I am saying it is intent. If you intend on copying something you are. If you are purposefully looking for a loophole “from scratch” you most certainly are copying. In the patent world you can submit it referencing previous patents to make sure it is different enough (form or function). We do not have that. Also patents expire, open licenses don’t (that I can tell).

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

@frosty

if you make your conscience the slave of everyone on the internet with a keyboard and an opinion you are destined to go mad.

That is just it, my horizons have been broadened. More than 4 years and no one has challenged my intent with my use of license. They all knew what I meant in using it (just don’t sell it). Now I see there are some other implications. If I am going to base my livelihood on this system I need to understand it. no one knows the spirit of the license better than the users, you all. I can always go back to everything I touch being patented and having rich people pay me for it. I am here because I want to make a difference and I this this licensing thing is a big deal.

If it works and people could retain some monetary rights, I strongly feel more large companies would let the DIY/hacker/makers do what they wanted, be more free with components. Open source to a hardware based corporation that can just keep paying for patents and own it outright for 20 years makes zero sense to let anyone copy and sell it. But if they simple could not sell it maybe we would get more things released for us creative types. The world should not have to be open source or patent. This in between market is probably by far the largest if it worked. I get pissed when I am told it has to be one way or the other and people are okay with that. This is encouraging patents, not sharing.

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

If I go open source and base my income on a paid support model, what incentive do I have to make it easier to use?

[duhhuhh]

What is important with all these licences is that members of the community show respect for them.

This is it. Community.

Only reason Tom 234K thinks he can congure up a OPCNC is because some subs would follow him to the death. Not all of them, lol maybe 30%?

Ry guy,

100% of the peeps here want, have, or are building what you poofed into existence. Greenbacks come your way because of this, not the license.

So this is a war of tribes.

VHS didn’t win because it’s better, or open, or had a tuber channel.

Licenses and patents are hunkydory and all, but at the end of the day, your trying to protect a copy machine.

I can copy it, you can, lots can.

This WILL happen.

Can you stop it, will the the license or you hold under the weight?

For how long, 5 years....10?

If this is the goal, lawyer up, and defend the license. It’s no longer something you can guess at.

so as far as I am concerned 3D printers are now public domain and their implementations are their right to choose license

Otherwise, make cool shit, the eyes will pop, and mouths will salivate.

Nothin last forever, but keep the peeps fed, and you will eat as well.

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

If popular opinion is lawyer up and defend it or let it happen I will just go back to working for rich people/corporations and let them do just that. I did feel like I was part of a movement but feel as if I am being pushed out because I do need money to continue this project.

I think a vast majority of all these machine users have zero care about there ability to sell my parts. The ones that do want to sell them are the issue, they aren’t “doing it for the cause”, they are just leeches. That is why this is not a bigger deal to most are saying I am just petty and controlling and they want more free stuff, I feel 99.999% users of any of these machines don’t even care what license it is. Hearing “open source” is a buzz words and seems better so if you saw two identical items you would probably buy the one that said open source, IF the price/performance was really close. Other than that the better cheaper item will sell. The ender or whatever it was clearly violated the Marlin license for a very long time, didn’t matter to hardly anyone as dictated by the staggering amount of sales. When did they change and listen, when people started pulling them off the shelves and sending them back.

People are pissed about Lego, that is a patented design. I am sure they don’t really care that people are making giant 3D printed versions, but they are legally obliged to protect the patent it or lose the license. That is the alternative. How is that better?

[jeffeb3]

I’m not sure where you’re getting this from Ryan.

When I look at what people here are saying. They are saying, the CC-NC is your right, and it’s doing what you want. They are saying you didn’t violate the prusa copyright. They are saying they are here to support you. They are saying that they are working hard for you because they believe you are doing the right thing. They are saying thank you for giving them reach. They are saying thank you for giving your time. Read it. Internalize it.

If you need to know what’s legally correct, for your business or your personal risk, then you need to talk to a lawyer. It may not be as expensive as you think. My guess is that they won’t have an easy answer for you. But maybe they can at least give you a corner to fight from. You can take the risk and just make an educated guess. Risks are all around us. There isn’t a really pressing reason to get that answer though. At some point there might be, but not today.

There have been a lot of people who have put in a lot of hours into this community. There are a lot of people who no doubt want to put in a lot more. We want you here. We need you here. We also want what you’ve built to stay here. The shop, the forums, the designs, they are awesome. This is the core of this project. Keep it up. Push it forward.

But you’re free to go anytime. Your time means more to you than anyone else. I’m hoping this is just a low point. Time will tell. You’ve been at this for 4 years, and it’s been a tough three weeks. I imagine part of you just wants a way out. Dealing with this is far from your dream job it once was. Be patient, calm, focused, and make sure that if you change course, you’re doing what’s right for you.

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

That was just in reply to DuhhUhh’s post.

I am not planing on going anywhere, just trying to figure out how to do thing from this point forward in regards to the MPCNC. I came here for the MP3DP issue and somehow putting it out there I solidified my CC-NC stance even further. I think I need to clarify some things on the license page a bit because of it.

The MP3DP needs files to get released again. I will try and put some time into it later to get step files, if it is a hassle I will not be releasing it. I spent all yesterday on this and wanted to get out firmware and finalize the Community docs.

[frosty]

LEGO has a trademark on their name, logo, and the shape of their minifigs (since they use that shape as part of their trademarked branding (same as the “coke bottle” for CocaCola), their patents on the bricks expired in the 70s and they have survived on innovation and brand recognition for the past fourty years. They defend their trademark (as they are required to do if they want to keep it) but anyone can make compatible bricks. A quick look through their wikipedia page shows the only legal actions related to companies making copycat sets, cloned minifigs, and that sort of stuff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_clone).

The best way forward may be to get your logos, trade dress, brand identity, etc. documented and trademarked because that appears to be legally defensible (and if their isn’t a respect of copyright there is (at least in some quarters) a distaste for off-brand imitations or straight up ripoffs. Your STLs are (IMO) protected by copyright, at least so far as being used directly for printing, as you have experience with already. If you embed enough of your trademarked look&feel (logos embelishments, other non-functional but “cool” looking bits into the parts you have the basis of a trademark infringement complaint against people making remixed parts that retain your trademarks (though, like with Lego, you can’t keep people from making functionally equivalent parts (just without your TMs).

I think that if you continue to build the brand, keep a reputation for customer service and quality, and provide good support you will be able to survive any cheap imitations/knockoffs however, I think the secret is probably Trademarks since Copyrights are clearly not getting it done and Patent protection is not really an option since these are already publicly disclosed.

One bonus though: 1. Consider a very low-key Patreon or PayPal tipjar so that people who are interested can throw you a few bones on an ongoing (or one-time) basis.

[vicious1 (Ryan)]

And. Thank you for making sure I didn’t just check out. Tone is not my strong suit in communication by text. In person everything is usually followed with a laugh. I guess I sound like a meany without that.

[twolf (Tim)]

Seriously, don’t give up. If you give up and just go back to your day job “those” people win by default and they’ll be encouraged to continue doing stuff like that in the future.

[duhhuhh]

Being an engineer and inventing cool widgets is one thing, being a leader or voice of a movement is a 2 ton heavy thing.

We’re still talking bout peeps here.

If the peeps want to support you they will. No amount of licensing will put their hand on a GNU bible.

We are all leeches in our own dastardly ways, and we justify it in whatever way makes us not hurl. Anyone ever use company resources to photocopy their ass?

How many smarties are out there that have a severe case of the “F* Me, I could have done thats” when they see any of the DIY CNCs available.

This is just reality. Smarties will climb on top, rip & tear down everything, in hopes to bring up a bigger, better, more kissable widget.

Most here prolly want to throw money at you for doing the work, so they don’t have to strain the brains. The leeches will benefit as well, but every ecosystem needs a toilet.

So open legs, closed, right, left, US, metric, blonde, brunette, hairy or shaven, doesn’t matter. Peeps does.

[billsey (Bill)]

IIRC none of the MP3DP parts will fit on a Prusa and none of the Prusa parts will fit on an MP3DP. That actually has been a detriment to building your design, since there are so many more mods for the Prusa. I still haven’t found a dual extruder bowden mount with level sensing and part fans, but probably could if I had a MK2. There are only three or four base designs for FDM printers and the fact that yours is has a horizontal moving X axis, a horizontal moving Y axis and a vertical moving Z axis such that the X axis sits over the middle of the Y axis and moves up with the Z axis doesn’t make it derivative enough to step on Prusa’s toes. I’d ignore the troll unless he’s with Prusa, the company.

[duhhuhh]

FWIW, you don’t come off as puffy for defending your baby, just seems your waving words at that dingo, when you should be clocking it in the noggin with the boot you already have.

I still stand by my OG post here, find some hungry tubers and send kits with no strings for truth. Reap the cream, when the right one blows up. Rinse and repeat.

Tubers love free shit almost as much as subs, likes, and ringing that damn bell.

 

[clay]

@DuhhUhh, you truly have a way with words. I’m sure you will go down as one of the great philosophers of our time.

[frosty]

You would need to find the right sort of YouTube personality, I’d think. I wonder if Matthias Wandel would ever try assembling one? He’s thrifty enough to appreciate conduit/608 construction, certainly. Biggest risk is he starts remaking parts out of plywood and painting it green…