Hacker News Reader

Comment by Istof | Hacker News Reader

The whole point of 3D printing is that you can create almost anything but they don't let you print your own files at Amazon?

View on HN

They have an option to "personalize" [1] the objects you're printing.

I agree it's kinda missing the point, but they're likely focusing on the larger, mainstream, Etsy-style users. People that don't want (or don't know how) to create their own objects, but would like to get something semi-personalized.

And, of course, they can avoid the entire discussion about copyright infringement, or printed guns. It's a safer first step.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Create-Your-Own-Printed-Mixee/dp/B00KD...

That opens up potential copyright/patent issues, I fully understand why they wouldn't want to risk it.

Why don't they call their toys custom injection molding? it's a marketing ploy?

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting they're not actually 3d printed toys?

I'm sure that they are 3D printed but they are not offering the full benefits of 3D printing (and far from it) ... calling it 3D printing is almost irrelevant (although quality can sometime differ when using some types of 3D printing).

Injection molding refers to a specific manufacturing process that Amazon is not using.

http://www.vulcanmold.com/uploads/image/plastic-injection-mo...

Because that would be completely wrong. It's not custom, and it's not injection molding.

What they're doing isn't custom, and they're not claiming it is. It is 3D printing, and they are (correctly) claiming it is.

I was not talking about their 3D printed products... I was talking about their other products.... Fisherprice toys for example... Why don't they tell you how they where molded?

Ah, ok. That's a fair point.

As far as I know physical goods cannot be copyrighted. You can (again AFAIK) legally copy an Ikea closet, by measuring the parts, and building similar parts. Now the actual design is copyrightable, but you'd not be violating copyright by taking an unauthorized copy and making a physical object. The person making the unauthorized copy of the design would be violating copyright.

Patents are another issue. And trademarks. But you'd even be allowed to "reverse-engineer" eg: a cup (that is, measure it), and print a copy.

This legal "hole" is likely to be plugged through lobbying and new legislation -- to the point where if you have a nice Ikea (or other) closet at home, you won't (technically) be allowed to make one that looks just like it for your other bedroom etc... but so far it is legal.

> Patents are another issue. And trademarks. But you'd even be allowed to "reverse-engineer" eg: a cup (that is, measure it), and print a copy.

I'm not sure that's correct. Patents restrict rights by granting exclusivity on making, using, or selling, so reverse engineering a patented cup and printing it is still in violation of the patent.

I was unclear. I meant that copying a cup would not be copyright infringement. That's what I meant by patents being a different issue.

Then they would need to regulate the printing of guns, presumably

Reply on news.ycombinator.com