Are you intentionally ignoring this?
It doesn’t get more right if you are repeating it over and over again.
11 Likes
New around here? If yes, welcome!
I never posted this or said it more than once and it was here, in this topic.
Someone did, i just don’t want to search for it because… i don’t care. It’s a feature and meant to come from the factory. That’s enough for me as it is and the function is still there… for now. It’s all it matters 
But i am also not defending or attacking the printers. I am attacking the company as a consumer.
Edit: well, cr@p, misunderstood what you said. I am sorry. I got a notification and i thought this was an answer to what i said and posted. I must get out of the forum for a while because it’s messing with my head and judgement 
1 Like
Better to be a fanboy than a full-blown lunatic hateboy!
That’s duplicitous. That’s like my cell phone manufacturer saying, “We never said you could keep using the speakerphone on your device—we might change our minds one day.”
I don’t know how this could be any simpler to understand. We’re not talking about ongoing support for a feature(LAN-only mode) that relied on a perishable resource. We’re not discussing something like a pay-per-view system. What we’re talking about is a core function, coded into the device at the time of shipping, being disabled after the sale. That is a violation of multiple statutes, but let’s start with the First Sale Doctrine.
17 U.S. Code § 109 of the U.S. Copyright Act stipulates that once a customer legally acquires an item, they have the right to resell it. The manufacturer does not have the right to restrict its sale or use after purchase. This is just one of many consumer protections in the U.S. and it applies in this scenario.
Or, we could just call this Common Sense. But as Mark Twain put it, “It should be called ‘rare sense’ because there ain’t nothing common about it.”
6 Likes
You can’t argue with a pigeon, it can only make one sound.
2 Likes
Um, I’d just like to point out this is for the A1/A1 mini, not the P/X series, which interestingly enough don’t seem to have any reference to LAN. Or at least I couldn’t readily see it when I was looking through the product pages for them a few hours ago. Might be a good idea to wait for at least some beta firmware for those before bringing that up. 
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”
M.T.
If only Bambu would do as good job at their software as its god at gaslighting people…
4 Likes
Said the CEO of any billion dollar company
3 Likes
Please enlighten us on the “proper interpretation” instead of slinging insults.
People will be more likely to listen
3 Likes
- EULA (End User License Agreements): Companies can include clauses in their licensing agreements that grant them the right to modify or remove features, particularly if safety concerns are cited. Such agreements must be clear and fair to be enforceable.
- Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act: This law governs warranties and can provide protection against claims from customers, as long as the company operates within the terms of the warranty and takes actions in the consumer’s best interest.
- Product Liability Protection: If a feature presents a safety risk that could cause harm, companies can rely on safety standards and regulations from agencies such as the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to justify the removal and mitigate legal risks.
- DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act): Under Section 1201, companies may sometimes claim that changes are necessary to ensure the product’s safety and to protect intellectual property rights, particularly for digital products.
- Common Law Principles: General legal principles can support companies taking action to prevent harm or safety issues. Courts tend to protect companies acting in good faith to reduce risks to consumers.
The first sale doctrine, as outlined in 17 U.S. Code § 109, safeguards consumers’ rights to use, resell, or transfer legally purchased products without interference from the manufacturer. However, this protection pertains specifically to ownership rights and does not explicitly regulate a manufacturer’s ability to modify or disable product features after sale.
In cases where a company removes a feature due to safety concerns, 17 U.S. Code § 109 remains applicable in ensuring that the customer retains ownership of the product despite any changes. While the company cannot reclaim the product or impose restrictions on its general use without the owner’s consent, modifications—such as the removal of unsafe features—are not necessarily in violation of this law if such actions are justified under other legal frameworks, including liability laws, public safety regulations, or provisions outlined in End User License Agreements (EULAs).
In summary, while 17 U.S. Code § 109 limits manufacturers’ control over how a product is used after it has been sold, it does not preclude them from implementing necessary changes to address safety concerns or ensure legal compliance, provided these modifications are supported by applicable laws or contractual agreements.
Bambu doesn’t care – they already have your money.
1 Like
Do you avoid 2FA on your bank account? If so, then you aren’t as smart as you think you are. What Bambu is doing for the MakerWorld web site is no different from what your bank is doing. The only reason they do email instead of with SMS is because they don’t have your phone number.
As for “stealing cookies,” you clearly don’t know how the authentication with cookies works, but you do you, ok?
1 Like
My kid’s high school robotics team has two X1C, two P1S and an A1 mini. The team funding source bought one of the Ps, and parents bought the others. (Obviously the parents are on the higher end of the income scale.)
And these kids really know how to operate the machines. They’re aces with Fusion360.
I see other teams with 3D printers at the First Tech Challenge robotics competitions, and all of the machines are Bambu.
3 Likes
Same here.
If they force me i’ll start with other brands of printers.
1 Like
But the kids didn’t, which was my point. It’s great to see children using 3D printers, as it provides an amazing opportunity for them to explore their creativity and sometimes even go beyond what they imagined possible. My daughter often sketches her ideas on paper, and I transfer them into 3D models. From there, we decide whether to use a CNC machine or a 3D printer, depending on what’s most suitable for the project.
I hope those who purchased the printers took the time to carefully read all the fine print beforehand to avoid any unpleasant surprises later. It’s always a good idea to fully understand the terms and conditions to ensure there are no unexpected limitations or issues down the line.
1 Like
Let’s say, in theory, that “safety” applies here (it doesn’t btw), how would you explain this answer bambu spokes person gave:
There are industry-strandard secure authentication methods that ensure security without the need of any proprietary middleman authentication app. Bambu rejected such methods.
This reasoning is invalid. It’s a consumer trap: There’s shady stuff in the TOS? “Oh don’t worry, that’s just legal bs for future, company won’t go evil!” Company does stupid stuff like this? “Oh, you didn’t read TOS, did you? It’s on you!”
7 Likes
Once again, you were aware that you purchased a printer that is not open source. If you’re not satisfied with closed-source printers, it’s best to avoid buying them, regardless of how good the hardware may be.
Making threats to blow up, burn, or otherwise destroy your printer is so counterproductive to the issue at hand—especially when the function hasn’t even been implemented yet—that it’s frankly laughable.
1 Like
But playing gatekeeper for no reason, all day long, is super productive.
3 Likes
OK, so… any sane calls, by people who passed Network Security 101, for bambu to go with industry-standard practices, that are MORE SECURE and results in no downside to end users, are what? “proprietary stuff, you get no say”?
3 Likes
I posted this on another similar thread, but it applies here too…
Just let us be…
6 Likes