3D Printing And Intellectual Property (IP) Infringement

Is That the Sound of 3D Printed IP Infringement? (+Video)

John Hornick and Rob Wells | August 15, 2016

I have written and spoken extensively about 3D printing away from control, which means the ability to 3D print a part or product without anyone knowing about it or being able to control it.  Although Gartner does not use this term, 3D printing away from control seems to underlie its prediction that “By 2018, 3D printing will result in the loss of at least $100 billion per year in intellectual property globally.”
Some of those losses will result from infringement of IP rights, namely, utility and design patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets.  Some of those losses will result from reverse engineering part designs.

Intellectual Property Surrounding 3D Printing

According to Russell Slifer, Deputy Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, patent filings relating to 3D printing have increased 23-fold over the last five years, and trademark filings for businesses involved in 3D printing have increased 300% over the same time period

Source: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/514698/Patent/The+Promise+And+Pitfalls+Of+3D+Printing

[Click on link for video] Source: https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/sound-3d-printed-ip-infringement-93851/

The availability of 3D printing also makes it more challenging to enforce patent rights. At the USPTO conference, Professors Tim Holbrook and Lucas Osborn discussed the problems of enforcing patents on products that can be easily 3D printed, and referred to their recent article, “Digital Patent Infringement in an Era of 3D Printing,” 48 U.C.D.L. Rev. 1319 (2015). They noted that because CAD files are not considered component parts of an invention, providing CAD files is not considered contributory infringement. They explained that while sharing CAD files might be considered inducing infringement, liability for induced infringement requires (i) an act of direct infringement, (ii) specific intent to induce infringement, and (iii) an affirmative act by the inducer.

Source: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/514698/Patent/The+Promise+And+Pitfalls+Of+3D+Printing

"This whitepaper examines the relationship between copyright and 3D printing, focusing specifically on how copyright could be used to hinder the development and growth of 3D printing."   Source: https://www.publicknowledge.org/files/What's%20the%20Deal%20
with%20Copyright_%20Final%20version2.pdf

<more at https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/sound-3d-printed-ip-infringement-93851/; related articles and links: https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/12/a-prescription-for-preventing-3d-printing-piracy/ (A prescription for preventing 3D printing piracy. August 12, 2016) and http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/514698/Patent/The+Promise+And+Pitfalls+Of+3D+Printing (United States: The Promise And Pitfalls Of 3D Printing. July 28, 2016)>