Remix vs Original - Very confused

MakerWorld
1

I’m gunuinely confused by this subject. When I started uploading things to Makerworld, I came accross a few designs I liked, but wanted to change how they were implemented. My undersanding is that there are 3 categories of this and this is my understanding

  • Profiles - changes to settings or things altered in Bambu Studio (seems the clearest)
  • Remixes - downloading the model and altering the geometry somehow and uploading it as a remix (which links to the model it was remixed from)
  • Original - modelled from scratch

My confusion is that I’m fairly clear if I download someones model, take it in to a modelling programme and change something about it - it’s a remix. And if I start an idea from scratch (based on nothing) it’s an original. But what if I model something from scratch, not using a downloaded model, but based on a model with significant differences. I had considered that an original, but is it a remix?

I have spent a few days creating my own version of a filament storage system that suits my needs and physical space, but based on an idea and model from someone esle. The base looks the same, but all of the connection methods and design elements are completeley different. I had assumed I coud ljust upload this as an original, (as I have done with at least one other model), but now I’m completely confused. The idea it is based on does not allow remixes, so I know I can’t upload it as a remix. My question is can I upload it as an original (it does not use the original file/model in any way).

Can someone help clarify this for me.

2

It’s not a remix.

Whether or not it is original is more complicated.

3 Likes
3

Yeh, that’s the question I need answerd unfortunately

4

Original work. It is compatible with the original design, and inspired by it, but it is neither a copy nor a remix. Copyright doesn’t mean you cannot create your own version of something, it just means you can’t copy-paste their work and present it as your own.

If you were making a product for sale, then you’d want to talk to an IP lawyer. But for hobbyists like us, it’s not an issue.

5

That certainly is inline with my thinking.

6

Warning: This is a major pitfall for beginners.

Even if you design it yourself, i.e. without using the original geometry, it may still be classified as a remix. This often leads to heated discussions, especially when the original creator is involved. The fact is that you are taking someone else’s idea. This is why decisions are not always based on geometry, but rather on the concept’s overall appearance:

  • Does it resemble the original?
  • Does it serve the same purpose?
  • Were you inspired by the original?

Since none of these factors alone constitute proof, problems frequently arise when users draw too much inspiration from others. In such cases, the decision is often made in favour of the original creator.

You should definitely credit the original creator and include a link to them.

Personally, I would strongly advise against taking on projects like this, or at the very least, ask the original creator first. It always leads to problems - even if it’s not until months later, when the original creator sees it and requests that your project be removed.

The question you’re asking is actually the wrong one. The right question is: whether the original creator agrees to you adopting his idea.

Trust me, we’ve discussed this topic many times on this forum, and the outcome is always the same: months later, users have their projects deleted because they failed to do the most obvious thing and ask the original creator.

In short: Does it taste, smell, or look like someone else’s idea? Then it’s simply plagiarism - unless the original creator has given their explicit permission.

Let me stress this again: Especially as a beginner, I strongly advise you to steer clear of projects like this and focus on developing your own ideas until you have a better grasp of things. What are licenses? What is Creative Commons? What is a remix? How do I ask creators for permission, etc.?

7

Lots of opinions to browse through on the subject: Inspired vs Remix

For your own use, doesn’t matter. Before publishing anything, I’d read up on copyright in general, like from people who actually study law, and the specific license(s) involved. And review MW policies (their staff/system are essentially the final word on what they consider infringement, short of possibly taking them to court). Perhaps one could even ask them first, before publishing (not that I’ve tried to, or seen anyone here mention it). There are other model publishing sites of course, which can also be quite illuminating to review.

-Max

8

Well I didn’t do the project to upload to Makerworld. I did the project because there were aspects of the original design I didn’t like. So I was really building it for myself regardless (like many of the things I’ve created and uploaded), and then thought I’d put it on Makerworld (wanting to do it the right way). I’m only a beginner when it comes to sharing things for free on Makerworld, and genuinely dont want to do the wrong thing. I just read that definition I put in my original post. It is for sure based on the other design, but built from scratch in Fusion.

What I don’t understand about your comments is that there is so much stuff on Makerworld that is pretty much the same, and that’s not even considering stuff that is probably licensed (Star Wars, Marvel stuff). My understanding of licenses for that kind of thing was that you can’t sell the things you make. The whole thing is a quagmire, and I’m guessing so many people don’t even bother thinking about it :slight_smile:

9

Yeh, it was Makerworld guidelines I was reading, and finding vague on the subject :slight_smile:

1 Like
10

If fact, now that I’m searching around, I can find 2 or 3 other ones that look very similar :joy:

11

This is the most important point where almost all beginners fail: It doesn’t matter whether you did it yourself in Fusion - that’s completely irrelevant. What matters is: Where did you get the idea?

Let me give you a simple example: You like a certain Pokémon. You’re so excited that you decide to recreate it in Fusion. Do you now have the rights to that Pokémon? Of course not.

That very phrase, “from scratch,” is the start of a big mistake: So many people have written that without realizing that copying someone else’s idea is pointless, unless the creator allows it.. It’s been discussed a thousand times, especially among beginners.

Maybe you’ll even lucky and the idea is public domain, so anyone can use it? But to know for sure, you’d have to see the model.

Just because you can see it doesn’t mean there aren’t any problems. Take a look around the forum. You’ll keep seeing posts from users saying their models have been removed and their scores have dropped into the negative.

You can’t see how much has been removed, and there’s quite a lot. Like I said, you can check out the forum - this topic comes up pretty much every few weeks.

All it takes is one creator who thinks what you’re doing is lame, and then you’re in trouble. You also notice some beginners are often are unwilling to just ask the creator. The most obvious and easiest option. Many creators are nice and allow it.

Why don’t you post the link to the model? Maybe it’s allowed? :+1:

12

Are you trying to figure out what is legal or what makerworld will do? Makerworld doesn’t apply legal standards, they make up their own rules which can include “your model sorta looks like this one” or “it’s the same idea”. And then they might say “but if you prove you designed it yourself in CAD that is still OK”. There have no hard rules, it’s their system and they just do what they want.

Copyright absolutely protects the literal, bitstream 3mf file that you say your design is based on, but you already said you didn’t start by editing that. But it doesn’t protect utility things like “bases”. So if this were my project and I was concerned about the capriciousness of makerworld and their points system I’d just post it on printables instead.

13

I’m going to contact the creator. I know his upload does not allow remixes etc. I only use the term ‘from scratch’ because Makerworld defines a remix as using the original geometry of the model and altering it. I get what you’re saying but the Pokémon example is a great example. Try searching Pokémon on makerworld. There are a ton of Pokémon’s with downloads in the thousands. The law is fairly clear when it comes to things like not selling things that are copied form licensed IP. Disney has a long history of going after creators selling things they’ve made. But it was generally ok for people to model stuff on sites that shared it for free. I feel like the fact you are earning points (that can be redeemed) on Makerworld makes it a bit murkier. But I’m going to contact the original creator and see what they say. As I said, I have no intention of doing the wrong thing.

14

No, I know there isn’t really a legal issue here. I’m trying to do what’s morally right but within the Makerworld rules. That’s all. I’m just going to contact the person who created the original and see what they say. Not interested in ripping anyone off, or posting on Printables.

1 Like
15

Once again, and I really mean this nicely, since you don’t seem to have understood this yet: Just because you can see something doesn’t mean it’s allowed. You don’t know what’s already been deleted. I just want to remind Lego that everyone who used ‘Lego’ in their text ran into trouble. Just like “Labubu” and the others.

Just because you see something doesn’t mean it’s allowed. It just means it hasn’t been reported yet. Believe me, hundreds - if not thousands - have already made that mistake; not everyone posts about it on the forum.

There is a fine line between, for example, fan art or getting inspiration - and infringing on intellectual property or patents. While nobody will probably say anything if you make your hundredth fidget spinner, it’s a different matter if you directly copy an idea that serves a specific function.

Initially, anyone can upload anything to MakerWorld; there is almost no real monitoring - the only control is reporting afterwards.

As I said, this is just my advice, but trust me - you’re one of hundreds of people who have asked themselves this question. Many people ignored the advice and, after a month, asked: ‘Why do I have negative points in my account?’

That means you’re doing something much better than the previous hundred people. It’s this that sets you apart from the other hundred people who encountered problems. Great. :+1:

1 Like
16

A while back I wanted a pop dispenser to put in my refrigerator. I looked at all the ones on MakerWorld and decided I could design a better one myself. So I did and put it up on MakerWorld.

All three of these are true in multiple cases, yet my version is entirely different. No one owns ideas, no matter how hard some may try. As John Lennon sang, “There’s nothing you can do that can’t be done.”

17

You might be right about that - if John Lennon would decide - but here, the decision-maker is Bambu, and we know they have their own set of rules. In the broader context, it’s important to remember that I’m always referring to MakerWorld, not to what might be morally or ethically right or in the best interest of the community.

MakerWorld, on the other hand, very often decides to attribute an idea to a specific creator. He doesn’t even have to prove it; often, the upload date is all that matters. :sweat_smile:

18

For me this all too confusing, I started to load some of my models that I created for my own use then I got to reading on here and decide they all violate some rule, Most everything has already been done. If I need a dish/tray to keep small parts/screws and I hop in fusion and make one right quick it wont be legal for me to upload to makerworld because some one has already made a dish/tray. Me changing the shape, size, or color doesnt make it mine, even if I never saw any of the ones on makerworld prior to making my own.

19

Lego can’t take down compatible blocks

Games Workshop can’t take down compatible gaming figures unless you use one of their trademarks / logos etc directly or it looks exactly the same. (They tried it on us)

A patent is somewhat different, and I would generally stay away from implementing anything patented.

I’d write them a letter telling them where to go, and take my chances. Be sure to carefully check your jurisdiction’s legal rules for the specific wording you need to use in that letter, otherwise you can get “loopholed” in court. Also you should consider counter-suing them for harrasment, which tells them you are serious.

You should also take legal advice and not listen to some random retired ex-game developer like me. (edit: I was also a software engineer working in open source, funny how those overlap).

1 Like
20

It’s not about the bricks, but because people have been using the name “Lego” as well as the logo. Some people have also added the word “Lego” to the 3D model. By the way, the Lego mini figures are still protected.

That’s why Lego doesn’t take any action against bricks - after all, they don’t have a patent on them any more - only on their logo, name, and minifigures.