A warning to creators: Having explicit designer permission can still cost you

MakerWorld
1

Hi everyone,

I wanted to share a recent experience as a cautionary tale so other well-meaning creators don’t accidentally lose months of hard-earned points over a semantic misunderstanding of platform rules.

A while back, I found an incredible ironing test model on Printables (the one from the Uncle Jessy video). Because the original designer didn’t have a MakerWorld account, I reached out to them and got their explicit, written permission to optimize and upload the model so the Bambu community could enjoy it.

Wanting to be 100% intellectually honest and ensure I didn’t falsely take credit for his work, I uploaded it as a “Remix” and linked it to the designer’s original page. My sole goal was proper creator attribution, as I assumed posting it as my own original content would be a violation.

However, because I only optimized slicer settings to make it compatible with Bambu printers—rather than physically altering the geometry—the automated system flagged it as a 1:1 duplicate. My account was hit with a massive ~800-point penalty.

I opened an appeal, and to their credit, the MakerWorld support team was incredibly polite. They explicitly reviewed the case and completely recognized that I did nothing wrong. They stated to me in writing:

“We fully understand your situation and truly recognize that this was an unintentional, non-malicious mistake resulting from a misinterpretation of our remix rules. We appreciate that your original intention was only to properly attribute the creator and share a great design with the Bambu community, not to claim improper credit.”

However, they noted that because point-deduction policies are set in stone to maintain platform-wide consistency, they are unable to waive or mitigate the penalty because the system automatically clawed back the 800 points the model had accumulated while live.

The Core Issue with this Outcome:

While I completely support MakerWorld’s fight against plagiarism and malicious point-farming, the current automated system lacks critical nuance. By failing to account for clear intention and documented creator permission, this automated penalty places good-faith accounts into massive deficits. As a creator, it makes it incredibly difficult to imagine posting future content when a simple misunderstanding can wipe out months of earned points.

I accept that the model is gone and will remain gone. However, I am tagging @MakerWorld and @BambuLab here in the sincere hope that the administration team can look into adding a layer of human review or options before executing massive automated penalties on accounts with documented, verified permission.

The Lesson for Everyone Else:

Even if you have the designer’s written permission, never use the Remix button unless you fundamentally change the physical geometry. If you are bringing a model over with permission, you actually have to upload it as an “Original Project” and just put the permission disclaimer and a link to their profile in the description - as counterintuitive as that may seem.

I’m incredibly disappointed to lose 800 points over a genuine attempt at creator advocacy, but I hope this post saves someone else in the community from hitting the same algorithmic trap.

4 Likes
2

The same could happen to you if you upload it as the original and someone comes across it, realises that it isn’t labelled as a remix and reports it, or if it is already available on another site.

We actually had a case where the creator had initially given written permission, but then changed their mind after two months and uploaded it themselves. That written permission is completely useless. Why? Because MakerWorld then says - and I hope I’m using the right term - that this is a civil matter.

One may be right, but MakerWorld won’t enforce that because it’s not their job; instead, a lawyer would have to be hired.

That’s why almost everyone advises against using anything created by another designer, even with permission, as the designer could change their mind at any time. If that happens, the original designer is almost always judged to be in the right at first, and you would have to settle the matter through civil litigation.

MakerWorld isn’t a legal advisory service; when in doubt, they just look at the date - that’s all they can go on.

In a nutshell: If you upload this as the original, you might actually run into similar problems - it’s just a different flavor. Being right and getting justice are two different things. In cases of doubt, the decision is always made in favor of the original creator, and the matter is sorted out later, or never.

2 Likes
3

I totally agree and you’re 100% about “right” being different from “just”. What’s hard to understand is that even in a scenario where there is no dispute (both creators agreeing, the licenses all allowing for publication…etc.); the system still “punishes” a user for posting the model automatically and Makerworld isn’t able to change it. I totally understand and support their desire to ensure they are protecting the hard work and intellectual property of makers and maintaining the integrity of the platform - but as a maker I trust them to do that fairly and justly - especially when they acknowledge themselves that the intentions were aligned with community guidelines. (Which to your point may be putting too much trust in them). Maybe they need to create a new option or change the wording in the “original content” option for situations like this? That would at least allow for more community driven growth and content - which this whole hobby and industry is based on.

2 Likes
4

Right now I’m thinking of “Mercy” with Chris Pratt :skull_and_crossbones:

5

This doesn’t have to happen automatically through the system. All it takes is for one person to provide false information intentionally, and the system will flag it right away. They don’t even have to be fake documents; just stating “I am the creator” or “The original is on a different page” and providing a link is enough.

Actually, that’s a bit “exaggerated”; often, a simple report is enough: “This is incorrectly labeled.”

Then the system always follows this rule: First, hide it; in the worst case, even delete it; questions can be asked later.

However, I don’t think it really happened automatically in your case. The system rarely does anything automatically. Often, it’s just a user who doesn’t like you for various reasons… In 95% of cases, there’s always a user behind it, because the system rarely flags anything on its own. It does happen - that 5% - but rarely.

6

I agree with @RetroSharky, this is not automated as they do nothing proactive.

They rely on the goodwill of those that report offenders.

Unfortunately, those people (the quality ones) have disappeared due to extremely useless staff failing to obverse the rules equally to those they love and the smaller designers.

@MakerWorld report processing staff appear to have no ability to use common sense.

Assuming your description is accurate (I have no read to believe others), this is yet another dumb as ■■■■ ruling.

Which reads as “We are thick as ■■■■, and we care so little about competence.”

7

Well that makes it even worse then doesn’t it - and I don’t imagine Makerworld shares information on where the accusation came from do they? In a better system there would be some sort of checks and balances to ensure false and inaccurate claims were also penalized or at least reviewed more thoroughly before making a final decision. I’ve only had one other instance where a question was raised about a model posted (I mentioned a certain brand name in the posting) and at least in that situation I had the chance to correct it. This one went straight to points penalty.

8

It depends. In the case of an IP infringement: Yes. For everything else? No.

Well, that certainly does not apply to your case. Even if so, there’s no guarantee that the person provided the correct information.

The easiest way to deal with this is to block these users if you suspect something is going on. For example, if you see unusual negative reviews appear out of the blue. This will prevent those accounts from being able to see your 3D models anymore.

But other than that? … Check to see if you’ve received any unusually negative reviews recently.

9

This is the entirety of your problems.

It used to be rather rampant. Where people would go to existing models and add a second print profile that does little more than change the filament colors or change a slicer setting. Occasionally an unsuspecting user would print the second print profile, giving points to the person who added the second profile that should have gone to the creator. There were those who made a lot of money off of MakerWorld by this practice. Never actually creating anything themselves, just attaching their profiles to other people’s work in a parasitic manner. Having lost points to these scoundrels, it makes me feel good that MakerWorld has been taking down these types of profiles.

1 Like
10

Yes - I’ve seen that too and totally agree. I’ve learned to personally make a habit out of looking for designer profiles when I’m printing.

In my specific case the model wasn’t on makerworld at all (it was on Printables) and the printables user didn’t have any interest in setting up a makerworld profile to post it there. He was very supportive of the model being shared with the Bambu community and gave his permission for me to post it there. Since he didn’t have the original on Makerworld I was posting it “new” (instead of a print profile) and had to either choose to call it a remix or an original.

As others have pointed out - and I’m learning now; Makerworld doesn’t really have a good option for these kinds of situations yet and while they’re willing to hear individual cases they aren’t willing to change the outcome - even when they themselves recognize there was no real content “theft” or misrepresentation.

11

at least is not about paying for stuff :wink:

but same feeling

1 Like
12

This will be no surprise I’m sure, but I just discovered that someone else uploaded the exact same ironing test model to MakerWorld as an ‘Original Project’ and gave absolutely zero credit to the Printables designer.

And because they chose ‘Original’ instead of ‘Remix,’ they’re safe while my account sits in a massive deficit for trying to give proper attribution to the original designer.

You can see the uncredited listing here: Ironing test - Free 3D Print Model - MakerWorld

This is exactly the loophole we’ve talking about. The rules are inadvertently creating a dynamic where it could be safer to plagiarize a model as an ‘Original’ than it is to give creator credit using the ‘Remix’ button - even with designer permission.

13

They are only safe until someone reports it, the same as your model was

14

You may be right. I just noticed this person even changed the license type to “Standard Digital” when the original was a Creative Commons Public Domain. So the original intent was for it to be open source and publicly available but this other user is trying to… wait a second this sounds like another story I’ve heard recently ;p

15

And there it is. According to MakerWorld’s official policy enforcement:

If you take an open source model, falsely claim it as your original work by uploading it as an ‘Original Project,’ give zero credit to the creator, and break the rules by putting a restrictive Standard Digital License on it to stop others from sharing it… MakerWorld will protect you and let you farm points because ‘there are no restrictions.’

But if you take that exact same model, get explicit permission from the creator, try to be 100% honest by using the ‘Remix’ button, and properly attribute the original author… MakerWorld hits you with an immediate ~800-point penalty and refuses to reverse it.

The system is officially broken. The platform is explicitly incentivizing users to plagiarize open-source models as ‘Originals’ and wall them off under private digital licenses, while actively and severely punishing the creators who actually try to use the attribution and remix systems in good faith.

I honestly don’t know what else to say. I love this platform, but the logic here is completely backwards.

Screenshot_20260615-054701
Screenshot_20260615-0547011080×2400 229 KB

16

It’s always been this way and always will be. I have no idea why. So many people have racked their brains over this. Criticism has been directed at Bambu, etc.

Is it a language problem, a cultural problem, laziness, a matter of definition? Who knows.

In any case, thanks for your post; it’s really interesting to read about the outcomes of cases like these.

1 Like
17

Just sharing this final update - after a period of radio silence from Bambu (on a still open ticket) I ended up hearing back from LeoganPro who was shocked by the situation and very graciously submitted a ticket in support of me and restoring my points. I’m happy to say that my points have been quietly returned to my account (no acknowledgement from Bambu but maybe that’ll come later). I realize this is just a single win for a single user within a broken system but it’s something and hopefully contributes to precedence for some over all improvements.

Special thanks again to LeoganPro. Go download his stuff - he’s a great creator and an even better community member!

1 Like