Patent Expiration

a bunch of "laser sintering" patents.

http://boingboing.net/2013/07/22/get-ready-for-the-big-bang-as.html

Coder27 is right that its Laser Sintering.  The patents will expire in February of 2014.  To determine how this will effect open source look at Fused deposition printing.  Once these patents expired RepRap and Makerbot was created.  You will see this same thing happen.

Nate

I am not up on my patent law or even much of the basics regarding patents; however, given such excitement for the expiration as well as the financial implications, shouldn't there be a concern that the patent holder will renew the relavant patents?  Thanks for an explanation on this one.

David

David Scheltema wrote:

 

I am not up on my patent law or even much of the basics regarding patents; however, given such excitement for the expiration as well as the financial implications, shouldn't there be a concern that the patent holder will renew the relavant patents?  Thanks for an explanation on this one.

David

IANAL, but my understanding is that patents are not renewable.  You get a 20-year monopoly on the use of an idea (which is supposed to be original and non-obvious) in exchange for publishing it immediately (so others can improve on it) and allowing your rights to it to expire after the 20 year period.  Copyrights last much, much longer.

Throughout history we have seen huge surges in progress and innovation as soon as fundamental patents expired: two such examples are the steam engine and the aeroplane.

johnbeetem, thanks for the primer.  I was conflating the patent and copyright systems as well as thinking of how pharmaceutical companies change drug structures when their patents expire.

David

John, you are correct that after the 20 years(for a utility Patent) are up, the patent is no longer in effect/renewable.  Now in those 20 years are 3 maintenace fees that if not kept up with the patent will be voided.  Copyrights are much longer 90+ years.

Nate

One of the issues that will likely emerge after this next round of patents expire is that of derivitive patents - as in the case of Form Labs' Form 1 stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printer. SLA was the original form of additive manufacturing, so its patents expired first. The inventor of computer-controlled UV cured layed deposition of liquid photopolymers came up with the first models in the mid 1980's and has since developed the origins of that concept into 3D Systems, one of the largest commercial additive manufacturing vendors in the world. They in turn developed a number of related derivitive technologies growing out of the original patents, such as the use of partially-hardened layers, which yielded finer resolution in successive layers because the partially hardened material would blend more smoothly (less stair-stepping) between layers. This was patented separately, and so when the Form 1 consumer-grade SLA printer came out, 3D Systems brought them under suit for the use of partially-cured layers which they still hold under patent, instead of the SLA concept which had already expired.

Expect to see this type of conflict in the years ahead as variations of sintered material binding printers come to the consumer level after this first round of those basic patents expire in 2014, but the commercial vendors will want to restrict the open use of derivitive patent IP to retain control of their market advantage. The same thing will happen as other technologies come out from under patent control: electron beam freeform fabrication, ink-jet resin granular binding, metal wire melting, concrete exrusion, and even the latest patents on Play-doh and clay extruders - which are themselves derivitives of Archimedes' screw designed during the Greek civilization. Each derivitive will provide its initiator to chance to control the use of that IP for 20 years in turn under current patent law. One concern is that with regards to 3D models, thee are numerous current cases in wich the originator is trying to obtain protection under copyright law (up to 90 years after the originator's death), instead of patents - just in order to control te ability of others to copy the "style" of designs using additive manufacturing techniques.

Patents require that the patent cover only a particular design or process, so do not protect other designs with the same "look and feel" that can be protected for much longer periods of time through copyrights. Unless something is done to stop this push to control every design and those with the "same look and feel" for a hundred years or more, additive manufacturing could be stalled outright in the name of commercial profit. Just look at what happened with the designer who created his own "alien cube" after seeing the movie "Super 8" or the gentlemen who designed a few models for his son to play Warhammer with until Games Workshop's cease-and-desist latter arrived.

Kalani