Non commercial use of patents is not illegal
suse.groenbaek.net
suse.groenbaek.net
The only thing you don't need a license for is for purely speculative work, generally interpreted as nothing more than idle curiosity. Even research (such as trying to build a new invention out of an old one) is technically patent infringement unless you have a license.
Here's the actual law:
Except as otherwise provided in this title [35 USCS Sects. 1 et seq.], whoever without
authority makes, uses or sells any patented invention, within the United States
during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/patent/35uscs271.htmlIt says nothing about noncommercial use.
If you want confirmation, ask Duke University. It tried to argue that non-commercial research use should be protected in the case Madey v. Duke University. It lost. The Federal Circuit (the court that deals with patent appeals) held that research use is still use of the invention and still violates the law. http://www.bakerbotts.com/infocenter/publications/detail.asp...
Here's another good summary of the Duke case:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied an "experimental use defense"
in a patent infringement lawsuit against Duke University, signaling that academic
researchers may be liable for use of patented equipment and processes even without
use for commercial purposes. The court declared that the noncommercial character
of the research in Madey v. Duke University was irrelevant. What matters is whether
the research "is in keeping with the alleged infringer's legitimate business,
regardless of commercial implications." In the case of a university, noncommercial
research is "legitimate business," subject to the patent laws.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/299/5609/1018?...The law is on the books, but I wouldn't stress too much if you replicated a patented invention in your basement.
Tape trading mostly went untouched; P2P is being fought.
Making stuff in your basement no problem; Everyone sharing plans for replication on their own 3D printer not likely to go unnoticed.
Also, as someone pointed out above, the central point of this article is incorrect. Manufacturing patented items for non-commercial use is illegal. So you would still expect to see lawsuits regarding illegal copying similar to the current RIAA suits.
Now, if the manufacturing of items becomes a trivial process, one could envision a "dark age" due to the lack of incentive to produce new goods.
In the long term this won't change, however there might be something that changes to make a surplus of energy a reality so the efficiency drop won't matter.
Put another way; There are economies of scale for mass production, but $120/bbl oil to truck those things to people might just make those advantages disappear.
There would be some savings, and these same forces are bringing some manufacturing work back onshore, but not a great deal of it yet.