I won’t appeal nor i want to. It’s no use. I prefer to leave it as it is and be at a loss to be honest.
But still, it makes me mad when i see obvious models in the same program that are indeed in direct violation and they remain there. I think i made a mistake in coming to the forum and point out some obvious people for what they are because it makes me feel like they get protection from inside and that is not how a platform should behave.
1 Like
Invent a new filament clip is the sure fire point farmer design
3 Likes
Been there, done that, I obviously got it wrong…
Damn, I think the trick is that people on reddit will find the perfect time to post, fluff up some hype, and then the mix of easy, quick, and the fact that it works straight away makes it seem like a success and get heaps of easy boosts
It’s all luck and timing sometimes….
My stuff is generally basic and hardly exclusive material so it’s not a bother, if someone finds a use for a model I’m happy… You’re right about timing and fluff though.
My best guess is that they’re just quick prints that people then leave ratings on to get some points.
1 Like
The criteria for excusivity are indeed flexible, here’s another example:
This model was created using this OpenSCAD script: https://www.printables.com/model/92976-christmas-tree
Just change 3 parameters ($baseRadius=10; $trunkHeightWished=8; $fa = 15;) and you get pretty much the same thing - but not identical, because the script uses random numbers for branch orientations and lengths.
V2 is the same tree but with added decorations - which were stolen from Christmas Tree by BQEducacion - Thingiverse, the star was smoothed though.
V3 is just some more sizes, thanks to the OpenSCAD script, including the same star.
All three are copyright infringements, all three are exclusive models, and all three copyright infringement cases have been declined.
Note that copyright covers an artistic expression of an idea, not only the exact copy of a thing: If I took a song and re-recorded it with the same instruments, maybe changed a word here and there and tried to sell that, the audio file would have completely different bits&bytes, but it still would be copyright infringement. So even if that person created those trees from scratch (which I highly doubt) but to a level of similarity that makes them indistinguishable from the original, it’s copyright infringement. And of course it’s not the level of originality that MakerWorld says is expected from exclusive models.
My personal conclusions:
I’ll not publish parametric OpenSCAD models, just a few STLs, unless I don’t care about that model much.
Secondly, I’ll not publish exclusive models any more (I have 2), it’s bad for the community.
The exclusive model program gives more incentives.
Incentives are a path to the dark side. Incentives lead to greed, greed leads to copyright infringement, copyright infringement leads to suffering - as Yoda said (or something similar).
3 Likes
Wasn’t sure how to say no to this request so I just rehashed the reality, I’m not against remixing, but I knew what I was getting into when I chose to go exclusive, so… no I won’t request my model be removed from exclusive for you to remix it.
1 Like
This is one of the biggest gripes I have with exclusivity, it breaks the “building upon” that made 3D printing what it is today. But MakerWorld needs to do this to have the monopoly on these designs, otherwise remixes can be uploaded anywhere.
However, you can change the license after three months I believe. Most designs will be in the depths of MakerWorld by then anyway and you can upload it to other platforms and people can remix it from then on.
For most models, the first month is the most lucrative anyway, and after that it is trickling. So you won’t miss too much points. And you have given MakerWorld the exclusive head start and you have protected yourself from having a remix be more popular in the first week.
I don’t think many designers will do this and I don’t think MakerWorld has made it easy to exit, but they say you can. I have a couple of designs on SDF and only one on exclusive, but I might set them to remixable once I have had my fair share off of them (and donate them to the community if you will)
Good points except for those of us in the Creator’s Program and Maker’s Supply incentive program, where we receive commissions on maker’s supply parts sold via our models. These collect income and points in perpetuity- some lasting for many months. all things must come to an end of course, just pointing out this important segment of designer’s who chose to make MW our main or only distribution point
If the change is a monochrome version can’t that be achieved by the user choosing other colour combinations when presented in the print dialogue?
Or, is it more complex?
I do not think you should allow it either.
It is great that others have views on our work, but, shouldn’t we be the people to decide if we believe there is a need?
I have one model that just hit stage two of the makers supply incentive which is quite lucrative but also the end of the road I believe. And I’m not even sure the designs need to be exclusive or SDF? But yes, as long as a model keeps doing well, keeping it exclusive is logical, especially if you only have one platform and you use the cashout.
But after the peak you could change license, which doesn’t mean you should. I might, but I also understand that designers want to keep some or all of their designs close/protected. But if you want to enable requests like these and feel good about it there is an option
That must be so annoying for the remixer. Maybe Bambu will let it slide if you say that you give special permission (even though that’s not what a standard digital file is about)?
Surely they can just upload it as a new profile? Why does it need to be a separate model page/remix?
1 Like
Oh yeah, the profile thing…
They only state two reward levels. You do not need an exclusive model to be part of the MakerSupply incentive scheme.
Important update I’m sure many will want to know.
I was able to manually remove some of the models I had entered today. Seems the 90 day rule has been met if you entered on the first day or so.
4 Likes