This is the hint. The third-party payment provider that is involved in the commercial license, in this case, Paypal, is more likely the one who requested MW to remove OP’s offending models, because they don’t want to get dragged into the process of buying and selling IP infringing products (either physical or digital). Even if OP’s models are not in the program, if the payer happened to see them, they could make a request and MW would comply.
Another possiblility is the car companeis themselves made the request. In that case, probably many more such models had been removed, but OP happened to be the only one complaining.
I doubt MW responds to such reports from ordinary users since they are not the IP owners.
Certain manufacturers don’t want companies/people reproducing their logos, either for fun or for sale. Usually they will issue a cease and desist order; obey the order and don’t show thier item(s) any more. Other companies have no issues.
I would upload them in reverse. And named them reversed too. Maybe that will work. Like dorf badge, or irarref badge, or ehsroP . If we can’t win screw them
Well, it makes sense: Instead of letting car manufacturers make a killing, in the future we’ll just print our own replacement parts - like brakes - on a 3D printer! Then we’ll show these companies that we don’t need their safety-certified parts!
Right now, I still feel healthy. No lasting damage from comments - not from you, nor from anyone else - at least that’s what I’m trying to explain to my therapist.
I have no idea if we’ll need a health warning in the future before entering the forum.
In summary, I wanted to emphasize that I’m a typical petrolhead. I enjoy cars, and as someone else mentioned, manufacturers should be happy that their brand is being celebrated. I understand if I were to post spare parts or handles that can be purchased directly from the manufacturer, then I’d actually be generating losses for them. But here, it’s simply a logo I’m putting on my desk. Especially since you’re unlikely to buy something like that. Keychains are a “bigger” offense for me, because those can usually be purchased directly from the manufacturer. To me, it’s more fan art and a celebration of the brand. I’d also understand if I were creating logos that insulted the manufacturer. But that’s not happening here either.
The reasoning is pretty straightforward. I can’t speak for every country, but…
If they don’t take legal action against people who use their logo, even for “fan art”, then they lose the rights to it. This is something that every company wants to avoid. If a company cannot prove that it is protecting its logo, it may lose its rights to it.
I have no idea who came up with this, but that’s why some companies do it – and also why not every company does it. It depends on the location and the corresponding regulations.
Companies that have been verified to do this include Mattel, Lego and Labubu, for example.
In contrast, Apple, for example, has not yet announced any plans to take action against 3D printing, to name just one example.
That said: All of this can change at any time. It remains a grey area because fan art only counts if you create your own artistic work, brings something new to the table, similar to a remix, which is never the case with an exact copy of a logo.
This debate is as old as art itself - it existed even before companies came into being - because the line between fan art and plagiarism is so easily crossed. Labeling something as “fan art” doesn’t rule out certain consequences. The artistic concept must be clearly evident in the design, which is hard to say about a copy of a logo - for example, as a keychain.
Another way of putting it is: At MakerWorld, we as designers, we don’t want anyone to remix or copy our designs without asking first. Especially when the license expressly prohibits it.
This couldnt be more wrong from a corporate point of view, the brand is THEIRS to control. If you want to participate in branding products with their mark, you MUST get their permission and likely pay licensing.
All of that said; you are fully free to design and produce those for yourself for your own personal use. Make 1000 of them and decorate a wall, thats fine.
Trademarks have value. Allowing your trademark to be used freely by third parties diminishes the value of your trademark. Failing to defend known unauthorized use of a trademark has potential legal consequences as well; failing to pursue 50 parties and then going after the 51st weakens the claim against #51.
You are preaching to the choir. But what we think should or should not be simply doesn’t matter. It’s up to copyright/trademark owners and Bambu for how they want to enforce it.
If you post things that get pulled for infringement we can’t help. And it’s doubtful the laws are going to change. It’s just how it is.
