Google “patent court” and most links mention texas. Maybe its a conspiracy theory 
On a side note, I feel that some people here should look into what a stratasys machine is capable of and what comes with it as far as support and warranty.
Summary of the most important differences
| Merkmal | Bambu Lab X1C | Stratasys F170 |
|---|---|---|
| Price | More favourable | More expensive |
| Materials | Wide range, open | Proprietary materials |
| Print speed | Very fast | Quick |
| Attention to detail | Very good | good |
| Reliability | High | Very high |
| Software | User-friendly, open | Professional, customised for Stratasys materials |
| Community | Large and active | Smaller but experienced |
Source: Gemini
1 Like
All of this was put in perspective in 1990 by guru Don Lancaster in his series The Case Against Patents - casagpat.pdf
It’s crazy they fight against Bambu Lab the other companies like Prusa … do the same thing before too. And I believe Stratasys used developments done by the community in their prducts too.
Does any Stratasys printer works like a X1C at this speed with force compensation and material changer???
Are Purge towers known on 3d printers before 2016?
As I remeber Simplify3D for my double head leapfrog printer had this feature too.
I’m bowing out of this thread. Seems I’m irritating more than providing info and that wasn’t my intent. Shared an opinion that was off the cuff and I didn’t mean to insult.
Something like this has played out in Apple vs Samsung. Smart phones now all have pretty much the same form factor and the software visually can be very much alike. Back when Samsung launched the Galaxy that was pretty much true but there were fewer manufacturers.
Apple was irritated that the Galaxy was sellling very well and was very popular. It was a plastic and glass rectangle with a screen. It ran Android which was far more customizable than iOS but the app drawer looked a bit like Apples layout. Just the app drawer, and maybe a few icons. A lot of icons actually. There’s more but I’m giving an example so let’s move on.
They fought all over the world. In the US the court was in the Southern District of California. The ruling in the US was that Samsung did infringe, in Japan Samsung won it’s case.
In the end the Supreme Court got involved and Samsung ended up paying a smaller amount in damages than were previously levied.
Both companies strive today.
I hate to quote Wikipedia, but it does have a decent write up on this case. Google will provide more articles if you’re inclined.
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. - Wikipedia.
It looks like potential prior art for the flex plate.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/geckotek3d/geckotek-3d-printer-build-plate
Wow i read 98% of the patents stratasys has and they have patents for anything 3d printing. Its insane.
Everything from what they are going after Bambu iver to 3d printing confectionary choclate to 3d printing buildings. Removable supports, Nozzles, Sounds to me like they may be trying to monopolize through patents or at least make serious $
Here is the like for all the patents i read.
It is insane.
Sorry this link starts at page 17 i am not sure how many pages there are i got tired of going through all of them
1 Like
And that’s just a fraction of all the patents they own (20 parents * 26 pages = 520 patents.
On Google patent, there are ±1600 patents assigned to Stratasys Inc.
And on the filling document, they claim to have ±2600 patents related to 3d printing.
I agree it’s insane.
Did anyone ever wonder about the coincidence called LOCATION ?
Many companies lodge patents for their products or just ideas.
In the USA though it is a constant flood of applications.
And like with any patents in the USA there is no real need to be specific.
Include what is or might be possible / usable and the patent will cover it.
Companies got a patent for a teaspoon, ergonomical tool handles and of course over 90% of the human genome.
Just the human genome part should tell you enough as common sense and logic say such a thing can’t be patented but in reality it also means companies literally own what you are made of.
This problem is driven even further when it comes to claims against a patent or a patent holder starting an infringement case.
In almost all cases the courts rule in favour of the US company.
Even if the case is covered by patents in other countries where the case was already lost.
It was in the late 80’s and early 90’s when this ‘system’ was implemented in order to keep a market advantage hold by the US.
The term outsourcing became popular and with that shifting manufacturing to cheaper countries with fewer legal restrictions.
Patenting whatever is asked meant securing US products, even if it is just by blocking related imports in violation of such patents and other rights held by companies.
None of this was ever a problem though and the only thing we ever saw from this was when big electronic companies started banging heads.
Microsoft, Oracle, Alphabet, Samsung, Nokia, Apple, Sony,…
What made all this far worse was how ‘non-physical’ -, intellectual- and ‘general designs’ were allowed to enter patents.
We ‘needed’ these inclusions to cover code and computer algorithms for example.
But also to protect the often complex architecture inside microchips.
It is on these foundations Stratasys makes their claims today.
They don’t really fight against any US based printer manufacturer or third party parts manufacturer.
With that the courts are already in their favour and securing these claims would be another win for the USA as a whole.
Printers are not really like a Swiss Army Knife.
Every single component can be quickly revere engineered and even improved on.
These machines have come a long way and all manufacturers do what they do for cars and such - they do the same because it works!
The looks and fine details might differ here and there but the general principle behind is the same.
If Stratsys gets a full win here it not only means they would be able to dictate the license fees but also that they get basically global market control.
A factor US courts are only too aware of…
See it this way:
If you would have been in the 3D printing game for a decade or more and decide to manufacture your own and to sell them in huge quantities - how would YOU DO IT ?
There is only so many ways to properly transport filament to the hotend…
Very limited ways to deal with moving axis…
Even for the control electronics and capabilities of the machine you are limited - either you go all open source or risk offending someone by using code without paying for it (the new patents).
I mean, seriously: How could anyone just create a new extruder that is NOT violating their bogus patents already ?
1 Like
If you trust Elons word…
I dont know if this counts patents that were acquired (from Ac Propulsion or when he first invested into Tesla that had already existed.)
His honesty reminds me of his new buddies honesty.
3 Likes
Unless he thinks he himself is weak. He was hoping most people wouldnt take the 5 minutes to look it up. He was right lol. Welcome to 2024.
SpaceX has a total of 202 patents globally , out of which 84 have been granted. Of these 202 patents, more than 88% patents are active
As of July 16, 2024, Tesla has 3,902 patents globally, which belong to 1,221 patent families. Of those patents, 2,651 are active
Solarcity has 125
etc etc
But he would say you definitely shouldnt patent your ideas lol… Or in other words, “look over there”
1 Like
Oh I know, I got tired of reading through them all.
This is going to be a huge mess.
1 Like
Probably not for the consumers.
Bambu will show the Stratasys claims to be invalid, and the issues will go away.
OR
Stratasys will prove their claims, Bambu will pay them money, get a license to use the patents and prices will go up.
Nothing we can do about it but wait and see what happens.
4 Likes
I think this is another example of how the established 3D printer companies are trying to stifle innovation and competition by using their patent portfolios to sue their rivals. Bambu Lab has created a high quality, low cost, networked 3D printer with outstanding performance which completely changes the paradigm for 3D printing. Instead of relying on expensive 3D printers with costly service contracts, customers can now choose a more affordable and reliable option from Bambu Lab with an ecosystem of tens of thousands of users. I hope that Bambu Lab will be able to defend itself against these lawsuits and continue to offer its products to the market
We don’t know that, though. Without knowing all the details either one of these parties could be operating in bad faith.
1 Like
We can hope. We can only speculate in what we know. We have no idea how this is goingnto go until it gets going more.
And consumer wise that a big hit. Since consumers are the reason companies are in business.
Stratasys has patents on the whole 3d printing market. Everything. Robotic 3d printing confectionary 3d printing, etc. And yes alot of them are probably not going to stand, but thats a court decision.
We will ha e to wait and see where this goes
A wise man once said, “Anything is possible when you don’t know what you’re talking about”.
4 Likes
No offense to anyone, but for those who don’t know it yet, Europe is not an actual country (as shown in the image), but a continent containing 44 independent countries …(just saying, for clarification)
3 Likes