This is very true. I have no idea what this is about. I thought it was about an email from Bambu Lab that asking the developer to quit accessing their cloud in a manner they felt uncomfortable with,
I use Fusion to create 3D models. Fusion is not open source. Using the tools provided, one can generate models that interact with features in Bambu Studio. Over the past couple of years, updates to fusion and updates to Bambu Studio have brought the two programs closer together. In my work flow, Fusion and Bambu Studio are used in tandem, as if they were they same program. By your logic, Fusion should be forced to be released under the AGPL license. Bambu Studio also incorporates Microsoft Edge, or elements of it. I guess Microsoft Edge also needs to be released under the AGPL license.
Been dealing with it since i got here, mostly always with the same people, and i even played with it. I’m a grown man that had some tough moments in life. It’s not a couple of keyboard warriors and armchair lawyers that will bring me down 
I go low for a while but keep reading everything. I agree to disagree and try to be civil most of the time and even make a few fun remarks about stuff that i shouldn’t. But what would life be if we took it all to the chest?
I did what i thought it was right and to be sure that i was not throwing cement at a wall waiting for it to glue. I am pretty sure that now i was somewhat right in the middle of many wrongs.
I still love printing with Bambu printers at home but as a man of principle, i am phasing them out. Looking for a couple U1’s in exchange for my H2S Laser Combo if anyone is interested 
And i’ll continue using my precious A1 Mini that it’s a beast of a printer and does anything i want at home. Everyone is happy 
Thank you.
There is no interoperability between both softwares. Does not apply. You can use Windows and Linux in tandem through WSL2 and yet, it does not make Windows be open sourced. Does not apply.
Chromium is open sourced and MS uses it as base for edge. You can read about it on the MS Github. They provide commitments to chromium on a regular basis and share with the community. There is no interoperability with any other closed source plugin. Does not apply.
Note: i am not an “open source” advocate at heart. I have an iphone 15 Pro Max and also a S24 Ultra that i use daily. I have a Mac Mini M4, a Surface Pro 13 (ARM) laptop and an old Macbook with Linux. I have my main PC with Windows 11 Pro and also a self made living room Steam Machine. I work with all in tandem and don’t have any real preference. If a piece of software is good as the paid alternative and open sourced, then i’ll use it. It applies to Bambu printers that are closed and i still use them. It’s only a matter of principle and for me to know that i won’t be deceived in the future.
It’s on you to provide proof that Fusion is 1) a plugin and 2) considered a single combined program, or 3) Fusion contains AGPL code derivations.
In case of BambuStudio+networkplugin 1) and 2) has been shown in great detail. Just throwing statements out there about “workflow changes” doesn’t exactly support your argument about Fusion violating AGPL.
Are you suggesting that Bambu Studio (main program) loads Fusion through fork and exec? Or it dynamically links Fusion?
Using the tools provided, one can generate models that interact with features in Bambu Studio
The programs aren’t communicating with each other directly and each one can be used on it’s own.
Go ahead and prove me wrong: Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU Licenses - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
Bambu Studio also incorporates Microsoft Edge, or elements of it. I guess Microsoft Edge also needs to be released under the AGPL license.
The proprietary network plugin is specifically designed tor Bambu Studio. Edge is not. That’s the difference.
I’ll tell you what. Can we all be friends? Let this roll, see what comes out of it, participate with relevant information when available, etc. Open source or not, we are all here because we use or used Bambu printers at one time or another.
I am speaking for myself but they are not the worst company in the world, by far (looking at you Nintendo and nVidia). They just have to learn slowly so that they can grow in a meaningful way, respecting those who helped and still help. I am right but i am also wrong, that’s what makes me human. What about you?
I think this is what makes the forum great 
Smart man, you can tell who understands this from a developer perspective vs a legal/customer/corpo perspective
Now that you’ve broken our agreement to ignore each other and are constantly picking on me, I can respond:
I know you only created your account to argue against the open-source community without contributing anything never ever to the Bumbu community. Your MakerWorld profile is empty for years.
Since May 2025, you have been constantly fighting against the open-source community. The only topic you ever created:
However, just for you: You’re comparing: Software (Bambu) to Software (Autodesk).
However, what you don’t understand is that it’s about: Software (Bambu) to Network-Plugin (Bambu). How did you come up with two different companies?
You can’t argue with “by your logic” if you’re just trying to deliberately twist the subject and my sentences.
>>> Actually, that’s not even my own logic - I just quoted the license Bambu is using. <<<
Edit: However, I’m going to go back to ignoring you; we have nothing to discuss.
I think that there is an easy answer to this problem.
Reading through the comments made by the open-source crowd, it has become obvious to me that it is a fools errand to use open-source software. Who would want to deal with such an unruly crowd in any capacity. It reminds me of a video I saw not long ago, telling young programmers that on one’s resume, open-source is a red flag. Why would a company want to put up with such silliness?
The primary reason that much of early 3D printing was released as open source was because the technology was gleaned off of expired patents. The technology expressed in expired technologies become public domain. That is to say, consumer 3D printing technology is in the public domain. In many ways,. open-source is one group of people trying to control what rightly belongs in the public domain. I’m sure Bambu used the Prusa fork to connect with the 3D printing community, never imagining the luddite factor rife in that community.
The clear answer is for Bambu to create a new Bambu Studio from the ground up, completely leaving open-source out of the equation.
I’m just quoting your views on open source, before they get edited out, so that everyone can actually read them forever.
I think that there is an easy answer to this problem.
Anyone else noticed lately that some discussions on across various platforms don’t feel like you’re talking with humans that provide facts and logically coherent statements to get their point across, but some entity/system intended to waste time, change topics, come up with straw mans and never really answers questions? Not wanting to point fingers…
I’d prefer 100 fanboys explaning how I’m wrong over whatever this is.
I use them as if they are part of the same program. Fusion, Bambu Studio, and the firmware in the printers are all part of one big interconnected operation. The operating term here is “considered”. I consider them to be part of the same program. Also my space mouse. I mostly only use it when using Fusion or Bambu Studio. The fact that it allows me to manipulate the scene in Bambu Studio clearly shows an interoperability between the two. Why doesn’t my space mouse have to reveal their technology to the open-source community? Same goes with my keyboard? And my mouse? What about Windows? Bambu Studio only works if Windows is running, otherwise all I get get the BIOS screen, if anything. Or what about video card? You can’t run Bambu Studio without a video card. And my monitors, they are are also rather necessary to run Bambu Studio.
Another way of saying the Open source is bad for business.
Frankly, I think you are right. Bambu knew the direction that they were planning on going. It would have just been better for them to build their slicer from the ground up considering that probably 80 percent of the code in Bambu Studio is original to them.
If you are going to be scummy, might as well make it watertight.
I consider them to be part of the same program, but they are 2 different softwares.
The comparison here is that Bambu Studio works without the Plugin. Even if 2 pieces of software work together, they are still 2 pieces of software. If BS did not work without the plugin, that would be a different issue.
Just a note: The problem is actually the exact opposite: If the network plugin ran without Bambu Studio, as a standalone program, there would be no problem with the AGPL license. Twist the sentence around, and it will be correct.
If the legal department and the programmers had worked together and turned the network plugin into a standalone network application, that wouldn’t actually be a problem under the AGPL. It would have to be a separate program, such as an executable file. A program for the toolbar, or something like that.
Bambus’ mistake was making it a plugin. Of course, Bambu Studio runs on its own; the problem is that the plugin doesn’t run on its own.
It would have to be a separate program, such as an executable file.
So literally Bambu Connect.
Why won’t they use it then? Oh right Studio can’t interact with it.
And once the interaction gets too tightly integrated and specifically made for Studio, it’s not much different to the network plugin anymore and the same AGPL reasonings apply.
That’s a crazy false equivalence. The point that was being made about the plugin is that it has no utility on it’s own and can only be accessed in-process. It contains obfuscated code with a tamper resistant initialization sequence. It can only be operated on by dynamically loading from Bambu Studio. Your mouse functions just fine without Bambu Studio. Bambu Studio functions just fine without your mouse.
Bambu Connect has only one endpoint exposed, file upload. Can’t sync printer state back to the caller. It’s a half-assed attempt at appeasing 3rd parties.
Because it hasn’t been fully programmed for years. It isn’t even available for Linux yet. That’s actually why the workaround presumably was intentionally open in the first place, at least at the beginning, for linux users. - They just never closed it.
The Windows version has also been in beta for years.
That’s what I said. They’d have to choose between a lawful proprietary application with crappy UX, or obeying AGPL with the same UX.
Why won’t they use it then?
Because it hasn’t been fully programmed for years.
Disclaimer: it was a rhetorical question / sarcasm 