News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Open-source metal 3D printer. Parent comment

Re:Open-source metal 3D printer by lambdapower on Friday October 24, 2014 @02:59PM (#8505294)
False. This is a common misconception. There is also no "academic exemption" to patent infringement.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Open-source metal 3D printer by mrec on Friday October 24, 2014 @03:33PM (#8505478)
I agree that GP is dangerously wrong about noncommercial use in general, but doesn't the research exemption[1] muddy the waters a little?

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_exemption

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Open-source metal 3D printer by DannyBee on Friday October 24, 2014 @05:23PM (#8506075)
No. It is very very limited.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Open-source metal 3D printer by merrillii on Friday October 24, 2014 @04:58PM (#8505962)
That is true in the USA. In the UK, for example, there is an academic exemption. Practically there would be very little damages that could be shown by infringing a patent once in a lab.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Open-source metal 3D printer by JoeAltmaier on Friday October 24, 2014 @03:39PM (#8505506)
"Patents do not prevent "making". They prevent making for another's use. One can make and use anything (well, anything legal, I'm not talking about devices which are themselves illegal)." - Mike McCarty

Patents are for commercial use. This is just publishing the details of construction - anybody can make and use such a device for their personal use, despite any patents that exist.

[ Parent | on HN ]