More than that, the patent only applies to printers with more than one nozzle. It is more of a concern for Prusa.
1 Like
might be they are going for the most promising, easier and yet the most threatening (for MakerBot business) manufacturer. Or it might be because traditionally, businesses located in the Far East don’t usually bother with IP rights or copyright issues… or it might be that BL might have stepped on someone’s " left foot" or “rubbed” some hotshot asshole executive, at MakerBot, the wrong way… Might very well be that the rest are paying them royalties or license fees and BL does not… Take your pick…
1 Like
Personally how I have decided to support Bambu Lab (and let’s face it, the 3d printing community as a whole – this goes way beyond them) is by boycotting Stratasys owned products.
I have removed almost all of my models from Thingiverse which is owned by Stratasys (other than some remixes, because it’s my own personal opinion that it’s best to limit remixes to the sites on which the source model resides) and I will be uninstalling Cura from my PCs and sticking with Prusaslicer/Orcaslicer/Bambu Studio.
Of course I’m just one person, but I sincerely hope others take similar actions.
7 Likes
You and me both. 
We’re tired of supporting the rest of the country with electric, gas, oil, beef and crops. About time you moochers pay the toll. 
Texas is the top producer of cotton, hay, sheep, goats, mohair and horses. Some of the state’s top crops also vegetables, citrus, corn, wheat, peanuts, pecans, sorghum and rice. Texas is one of the leading exporters of agricultural commodities.
I think if this turns out bad for BL, it could lead to other BL problems. Like current owners having to give up use of their printer(s) and the possibility of class actions.
4 Likes
What’s a mo? Got a picture?
Quite interesting but they have a lot of problems with their suit. As other have mentioned, the heated bed idea is everywhere, used by every company I’ve ever seen. While I don’t know when that idea came out, an entire industry has been using that process for more than a decade. As for the purge towers, I don’t know. its more of a technique than an invention per se. I have two patents and one is a thing you can build, the other is a process. I can tell you that a process patent is much harder to solidify because its hard to patent a series of step that produce a function or product. Finally, If you leave a patent unchallenged for years the court may turn you down in a fight because you have let it go for over 10 years. I have been printing for years and I have never heard of these guys before. What have they been doing all this time? IDK. I a not going to dismiss their claim but its very odd.
1 Like
To many companies using the same thing that is in the law suit. Most of these have been in common use for a while now. They would have to sue all the companies that are using these things. Class action law suit. I do not think this will ever go through.
1 Like
They sure seem like a troll considering lots of 3D FDM printing stuff like Reprap existed long before they patented the stuff this suit is about?
Feels very similar to when SCO tried to sue “Linux” as a last ditch effort to keep the company in existence. Maybe Stratasys should try gofundme. 
1 Like
I’ll happily pay a reasonable price for mohair.
2 Likes
Not just that but the slim claims of the patents themselves. If you actually look at the patents, there’s 10-20 references of preexisting patents for each of them. They will have to prove the uniqueness of their claim. A patent is just a registration. You can patent just about anything. Proving the uniqueness in court is a different matter.
Fights like this go all the way back to the early Henry Ford era around 1907. Ford fought the Seldon patents and won.
This is just essentially, yet another, example of patent trolling using very vague terms to describe something which makes it all encompassing.
If you look at a few of these they are very open to interpretation in that their vaguely described inclusion virtually excludes any exclusions.
If the copyright laws globally gave creedence for ‘first to use’ rather than ‘first to file’ the vast majority of this kind of thing would disappear overnight. The US did use this up to ? '67 which is the more sensible system and still the case in Europe that proven first to use trumps first to file. I understand there was quite a bit of lobbying associated with this, no one would have done that if there weren’t profit margins to maintain and increase.
On the comment that it’s to stop the manufacture of 3D guns. In the US it’s estimated that there are well in excess of 400 MILLION guns in private hands, which makes you wonder why someone would spend $100’s on a suitable printer when it isn’t going to be too difficult to get a real and more functionaly reliable real gun.
In countries that have stricter ownership regulations and laws I can see you’d want to limit this kind of printing.
It’s isn’t about protecting an IP, it’s a pure money making move
1 Like
I’d love to see any guy, like a (des)honorable judge from TX, or any other guy or business from somewhere else being able (or remaining still abled afterwards 
) to come to my place and tell (and impose on) me that I can no longer have and use my own X1C combo … Though we don’t have the 2nd amendment on this side of the pond, we do have a duty to fertilize our land/gardens… and such a guy will do just fine…
I believe you meant “Only Fans”, don’t you? 
1 Like
LOL, that’s the last thing I would expect to hear fear a Texan. Asking Americans to give up personal property. There’s no legal precedent for that, at least that I know of. Come and take it!
However, class actions could and likely would definitely arise.
Saw a shoplifter yesterday. Owner called the cops on him. What a troll, am i right? I mean, the shoplifter was selling the stuff in a really nice shop at a decent price. Even added nice packaging. The owner was just jealous that the thieves sales were so good. Stupid anti theft troll. 
I didn’t say anything about giving up personal property. If you want to start an argument, at least get the facts straight. I said, “give up the use of”. All it would take is a single update to the firmware. Your printer could become a paperweight. Nobody has to come and take it. It would still be your paperweight. I’m just saying it could be adjudged contraband containing illegal parts and BL might offer a poison pill in the form of an “update” instead of paying up hundreds of millions in a settlement. It’s too early in the process.
And stop blaming Texas. 
The suit was filed under Federal Laws and the district court just happens to be in Texas. We’d like to run all the feds out of Texas. 
1 Like
I just want to say that almost all troll cases are filed in Texas.
1 Like
Little bit off, with due respect.
Stratasys bought the patent with most likely the only reason to force licensing fees. Where are all those open source folks now?
At least Bambu stated they’d not chase folks using their patents, only using to protect themselves. As well they created their patents, didn’t buy them.
Perhaps, but it’s still a federal court controlled by federal judges. The state has no jurisdiction in federal matters. In only recent years has the Supreme Court stepped in to reverse errant District Court decisions. Be thankful for the process. Whatever the outcome in “Texas”, there’s still light at the end of the tunnel. Hopefully.
1 Like
Yeah I know that, sorry to imply it was a state court.
There’s something with that federal distric though. I’d look it up but little under the weather.
I just know that Texas is the state to be if you want to patent troll. Historically that distric has been favorable to those bringing suits for patent infringement. A good bit of them purchased their patents by absorbing companies. There was one a few years back that created nothing, they just owned patents and sued for income.