How are models like this allowed under the remix option, this has over 1k downloads too. They say that if it doesn’t have significant changes it will be taken down, but that doesn’t seem to be true.
Cube Gear fidget Remixed by RB1105 - MakerWorld
2 Likes
Maybe it wasn’t reported? Report with all info and see whether it will stick
1 Like
This guy gave any original models at all?
Hueforge doesn’t count…
1 Like
what makes me sad… its clearly a remix, but people keep saying thank you. As if remixing a thing 100% is a great achievement. Sad.
Can someone get ponts with remixing so few details? I am new here, and if this is possible, MW should consider to work on that.
I reported it and it was rejected. Pretty boring.
Lately, I’ve been feeling that the reporting system on MakerWorld is ineffective. For instance, I recently reported this model: Universal Filament Clip by Hanti_3d - MakerWorld.
This model is not labeled as a remix and even goes as far as to be in the exclusive program, despite identical versions of the same design being available on multiple platforms dating as far back as 2020:
- Filament Clip by 3DP | Download free STL model | Printables.com
- Easy Filament Clip 1.75mm by brauky - Thingiverse
Yet, MakerWorld has taken no action.
Similarly, someone recently took my filament clip design, shortened the tail, and posted it as their own original creation with an A.I generated description:
- Mine: Perfect Filament Clip by LightBulb - MakerWorld
- Remix: Filament Clip by BossMad08 - MakerWorld
Again, no action from MakerWorld.
I’ve experienced several such cases. In the past, MakerWorld at least responded to reports, even if it was to request additional details or explain why a report was invalid. Now, I don’t even receive an acknowledgment of my submissions.
I am not particularly bothered by the remix, if MakerWorld wants to consider it a valid remix, that’s fine with me. However, I don’t understand the first case. It is clearly a model that has been posted by many people before and has no differences at all. How can that not be taken down or at the very least removed from the exclusive program?
This lack of response is disheartening, and it feels like reporting is becoming a meaningless exercise.
4 Likes
Use cloudcompute to show it’s a direct copy and make screenshot from cloudcompute. Not a single report I made using cloudcompute as a proof got ever rejected or unactioned.
Here’s a very short “tutorial” how to do that:
4 Likes
Welcome to the club, there are many of us that have landed in the exact same spot. 
4 Likes
Interesting, I will give this a try. Thanks @Johnny_Bit !
Edit: I was able to figure out how to use CloudCompare based on the instructions from @Johnny_Bit
It shows zero deviation from the 2020 model on Thingiverse which was posted by a different user. I do not understand how this model, which has been around for so long and posted so many times by different users, has managed to get 20K downloads and 20K prints without being reported and removed. That, along with the 1.1K boosts, is like what—5000 dollars? Incredible.
5 Likes
lots of people in this days just try to steal from others
im sure they don’t think theres anything wrong with it
check out this one I just saw on maker world
everything steal
1 Like
Who needs to learn how to model when you can just set the search terms to most downloaded public domain and copy/paste all evening. 
2 Likes
Am I missing something here? Yes, it looks almost identical (if not exactly, in terms of measurement)
But loading the files in bambu studios shows a clear variance in the specific print instructions in regards to the wall thickness, loops, infill pattern, density, etc. etc.
I mean, if you designed the original model and are making money from selling the model or something, thats one thing. But when it comes to makerworld where its all free to download in the first place I’m failing to grasp what the real issue at hand is you’re getting at. I mean that sincerely, with curiosity intended behind my statements, not trying to argue or say theres not an issue or anything like that.
I haven’t done much designing myself, and absolutely 0 publishing because for the past 5 months since getting multiple 3d printer models (p1s, a1, and a1 mini as well as an anycubic resin printer) I’ve come to learn there’s a vast number of nuances to how these prints manage to come out in terms of quality and actually understanding the variances that changing settings like thin wall detection or infill pattern and so many others can have on the output of the printed model.
Things designed and printed many many times can come out perfectly smooth without visible lines while printing with a .6 or .8 nozzle that look better than the detail the .2 is known to give. All the subtle setting changes, even the orientation of the angle it prints onto the plate at, can sometimes make all the difference in the world from my experimenting.
I’ve downloaded and started both prints at their default slicer settings and will post the comparison tomorrow once completed! Hope this response doesn’t come off negatively, just genuinely curious as to what your particular issue with it is beyond the lack of a VISIBLE design difference.
Very well may just have a super nerdy individual such as myself trying to perfect any imperfections they experienced while printing the original model.
Personal example of mine is in relation to hueforge related prints, as I’ve found many of them to not have the cooling fan operating for the outer walls and beginning layers, which has caused fail after fail after fail in terms of its ability to remain unwarped and on the plate for the entirety of the build.
My fix after 2 weeks of experimentation boiled down to unchanged heat bed temps, having to learn that when swapping from PETG to PLA, that the slicer will modify some values automatically, but just to fit the criteria of whats required for the filament type to most smoothly EXIT the nozzle, not a single change is automatically done that accounts for translucent materials temperature fluctuation, speed of mm/s (which is HUGE for PETG vs PLA from what I’ve read), and a few other things which can all also drastically change due to recalibration of your machine sometimes. Failed prints often lead to hiccups of the x/y axis movement, and in turn cause the calibration to fail to compensate accordingly.
Might be overthinking it, but after 5 months of nonstop experimentation I’ve learned most people are just downloading and printing files, and don’t really grasp a lot of the setting adjustments and how they can change a beautifully designed model to a nightmare of a printing process and vice versa- even with 3d model design professionals.
Hope some of my insight helps anyone reading!
I’m growing to love the community on here and hope to be a big contributor in the coming year.
I’ve done everything from fidget toys and hueforge to mechanical clocks and DIY drone projects, so i’ve been learning a ton and hope to learn more from others as well as share what I’ve learned with everyone along the way! <3 
1 Like
Welcome to the forum! Taking someone else’s model and changing the slicer settings doesn’t equal a new model. That’s a print profile.
10 Likes
I couldn’t agree more.
Someone said some people may think learning how to sculpt is not nesseccary these days. Well, yes, its encouraged by applications like we can find in Makerlab, and thats ok. But taking someone elses work and participate in the reward system is just stealing. I think we all agree here.
But what to do about it? First: If there is a comment in such a model that it may be stolen, we should take that minute to check, and then NOT like or download. Most people just want to consume and dont take that little time to credit the original author.
1 Like
It’s hard to be upset at users that boosted or printed it. Many folks aren’t going to research deeply enough to realize it’s just a copy. Many others probably wouldn’t care. The first result that looks like what they need they just use, and if it works they boost the version they found.
It should only take 1 user to report and show that it’s a fraud/copy for BL to correct it and revoke any rewards so posters stop feeling safe to post copies.
Yup. I’ve printed that filament clip before too. Honestly didn’t have a reason to question it. It’s a filament clip?! I don’t know.
Frankly though, if I had thought to look, or been aware, I would have tried to find the source, or a different one. I’m not interested in helping people that just repost other people’s work as their own. Knowledge of that aspect of things isn’t always so clear though, and while I do try and make sure I’m getting models from the legit designers, sometimes it’s easy to overlook that aspect.
1 Like
yeah I totally agree, don’t support folks you know are just copy-pasting. And when they get caught, give some sort of penalty to discourage it. I’m just sharing the idea of don’t be mad that the consumers/downloaders for being ignorant.
I can see how my words might have been misinterpreted, so I’d like to clarify: I did not intend to place any blame on the users. I was merely suggesting that it seems improbable that such a popular model has never been reported before. Given this, what other explanation could there be for it still being active today? Maybe I should reach out to MakerWorld support and see if they can provide us with an answer.
There will always be individuals who try to steal others’ work, there’s no getting around that. However, when such a blatant case is reported and no action is taken, it undermines all the work we are doing. It also puts into question MakerWorld’s ability to protect our intellectual property when they are unable to address violations on their own website.
Came to the topic late but… There are instances where stolen work go through it all and won’t get caught.
There are instances where “creators” upload models that were previously deleted and posted in a new account as a “new model”.
There are instances where makerworld turns away their faces because that “creator” brings them flow.
There are many cases that are being reported and not answered, that’s not new.
I hope you get it sorted out because it sucks, i know.
Best of luck
2 Likes
I have opened a case with MakerWorld Support to seek an explanation. I was hoping there is a legitimate reason why the model has not been removed. Perhaps the maker is the original designer and created it before the Thingiverse post in 2020. However, if what you are saying is true, which I have no reason to believe it isn’t, it is highly concerning.