Repeat Copyright Offenders Should be Banned

Almost every other service out there uses IP bans and while they don’t solve everything they create actual barriers for people trying to circumvent rules. I feel it’s poor to rule out IP bans right away, especially when currently there’s no actions being taken to prevent repeat offenders

Millions of people sit behind some NAT or transparent proxy out of their control, for a starter. Did you think your phone has a static IP address while you roam around the world? Identifying a user by address isn’t a good solution and never will be. The fact that “almost every” service make stupid, futile and misguided decisions, if itrue at all, does not magically make those decisions better.

You’re all still missing the point, an IP Ban was one proposed solution. Just like everyone has said over and over, I know you can circumvent IP bans, but they don’t do nothing and can at least set a barrier compared to nothing at all. Other options are available too, but the main point is that people are allowed to repeatedly break the rules and face no consequences and something should be done about this.

I really don’t care how anything is implemented and just suggested one thing that has already worked as a barrier for services like Discord, they do some strict barriers for VPNs/IP Bans that actually work. For some reason though, y’all are locked on to the idea that IP Bans don’t work and so the move is to not do anything I guess? IP Ban or not, there should be barriers/repercussions for this kind of behavior.

Interestingly enough, the opposite seems to be the issue for some very creative and generous people such as Grumpy Ol Vet Printing. His material was flagged several times by someone who claimed copyright infringement from his OWN accounts on Thingiverse and Cults3d. (They did have different account names though so that was probably part of the problem.) These were his creations, not someone else’s. In other words, someone reported him for using his own creations that he had posted on his Thingiverse and Cults3d accounts previously under a different name. There needs to be better vetting of actual copyright infringement or at the very least, a way for the accused to have a say in the matter before their content is taken down and deleted. “Guilty until proven innocent” seems to be the Bambu way right now. Of course, I’m not talking about someone else stealing your material and claiming it for themselves. I’m talking about the “Karens” of the world thinking they are the copyright police because they’ve seen it somewhere else before and didn’t do their homework before reporting it. I do acknowledge that he should have at least linked his accounts to prevent this in the first place. But just an automatic delete when accused is not cool. We need the ability to dispute copyright violation claims


Even without VPN it won’t work. Most home internet users have an IP that changes so multiple people in a geographic area using the same internet company will sometimes have the same IP (at different times).

The internet company could figure out who used a specific IP at specific times, but that information is not public.

You could end up banning the wrong person when they get assigned the IP of a previously banned user. It may seem like an unlikely scenario with the large number of IP addresses out there and the relatively small number of users on one website, but I used to be a web programmer and from my experience I can tell you that it happens more often than you think it would.

1 Like

Beware original creators may be hurt that way too!

At least make it the same playing field. If you get caught with stealing someone’s design, you get strike’d and either permanently suspended or temporarily suspended. But what happens when you report models that are not copyright violations? Nothing? If they have to face the same consequences they would most likely think twice before starting to spam report. Might not be the best idea if its a serious concern, but people reporting others for public property and what not. People seem to have no idea of copyright work, lots of people think they owns the ip of public property just because they uploaded a model to a page. That is not the case.

1 Like

The same user who spam uploaded other peoples models is back with a new account (they shared on reddit with the same username), this time using stolen images:

They admit it after I called them out on it, but insist it’s fine to take other’s pictures. The pictures don’t even match the model fully, the model is a different shape than the pictures. So far, my reports haven’t done much it seems

1 Like

I reported him as well. Let’s see what happens.

1 Like

Thanks, that’s helpful, even with the clear admission, the MakerWorld support denied the copyright claim

Probably another example: Entry in trophy contest the original is Design on thingiverse Original creator: Santiago Pescador

I hate this so much, the lack of respect to others work and effort. Only because some petty “gift” cash can be earned.

I am personal intrigued by the mind process of poster in these things. I asked the original creator with a PM a question on Thingiverse about this, if the person there and the person here are the same, this question can be answered. :grin:

1 Like

As author and creator of a design you hold the rights to that single design, it has nothing to do with public domain ip or otherwise. A photographer can take photo’s from public places or say a beautiful Italian car, but still holds the author right of that single photo.

Someone else can off course also take this photo of that same car, but can NOT claim the photo from someone else as their own.

In translation: If you design a new chair, although there are million designs of chairs, that is still your design and can not be used 1:1 by anyone else without permission. Anybody can design a chair without a problem.

If 2 people place their cameras next to each other and takes a photo at the exact same time they will both own the rights to almost the exact same picture. Same if you take a photo under some circumstances, i go back to the exact same spot under the exact same circumstances and take an exact copy of that photo. You own the rights to the file not the contents of the file.

Same goes with modeling a 3d object that is public domain. If you make a model of a 3d cube, its not like you have dibs on those exact dimensions, everyone is free to design their own cube at the exact same dimensions basically replicating that exact file. You might argue you own the rights to the file you made, but not the shape and measurement of that file. I cant take your file and start selling it, but I can make my own cube of the same dimensions and selling it, basically voiding that whole argument.


The “designer” admitted it and deleted his entry in the contest, got a PM .

Exactly that: You need to make your own design even it’s similar to another one. You can NOT use a design from somebody else and pass it as your own. If a design has unique features (like the famous design chairs trough history) then you can NOT make a 1:1 copy, without making an infringement. Law is very clear and undisputed about that. (as long the copyright is valid though, it’s not forever).

1 Like

And where do you suggest to draw the line? If you make a cube that is 10x10x10mm, You obviously doesn’t own that shape so I can make my own cube exactly the same. Where do you want to draw the line? I have to model my own file and cant just take your STL? But when I model my own file, can I print your cube and take measurements of it? Can I take measurements straight out of the STL? How about the individual vectors? At that point you are basically just copy pasting the model. Where do you want to draw the line?

If you make a shape, and you own the IP for that shape, then you can slap it on a model that is public property and still call that specific shape yours, not the entire chair, everything else about the share is still public domain. But what shapes are we talking about? How are you going to copyright a specific shape, that’s something even the biggest corporations in the world today have problems with, there is a reason every single smartphone is shaped the same and looks the same no matter what manufacturer. How did you make that shape? Combine a couple squares and circles that are public domain? How many public domain squares and circles do you have to combine before it goes from public domain to copyright:able? 3? 4?

You arguments are for a judge not for me. Why do you think there are so many lawsuits about this. One thing is in the is law perfectly clear though: you can NOT use, sell a creators photo, painting/drawing, design, lyrics, writing, composition, etc… You can make that cube all day long, but you can not use a creators cube file and pass it along as your own, unless the creator specified you can do so.

The creator may not be owner of the cube but he/she certainly is owner of his own file thus creation.

You may not like this… but it is how it is. (and that is good thing!).

Interesting reads would be about LEGO and their fight against this all. A rectangle which is protected!

Im afraid no judge would priorities a model on any of these platforms particularly high. So jow would you suggest solving that? Just removing every single model claimed while waiting for a judge to care?

The interesting part is more where you believe the copyright starts, a file is just digital instructions. Am I allowed to print the file and take instructions from the physical world? Can I read the file and take instructions from the digital world?

Lego is a great example, they think they own the rights to a rectangle and constantly gets ruled against them because a rectangle is public property, even though they added some other public property circles to it.

That is what i mean about owning a cube, it’s a hard sell. You are confused by two entities: One is legal right to COPY something ( in dispute a judge prerogative to rule about it) or Legal right to use or sell another’s own created file. If you have not permission than that is literally stealing in the eyes of the law.

You can NOT take a photo,game, song, etc (all digital) from a platform and selling or presenting as your own. You can make your own photo etc about the same content like a public domain item like a “sunset”. So you must make your own effort to create something.

You are only allowed if the creator gives permission. Like: Creator–>Spotify–>abbo–>listening. Photographer → stock photosite → paying → download.

:grinning: We can discuss this all day, but i’m signing off. :vulcan_salute: