Will The RIAA Need To Start Worrying About 3D Printed Records Next?
from the the-world-is-changing dept
We've been predicting for a while now that 3D printing is an area of disruption that is going to lead to legal disputes. Our expectations were that as tangible goods makers were disrupted in the same manner as content producers, it was only a matter of time. But what if 3D printing continued to disrupt content producers as well? Hephaestus points us to a story about how Amanda Ghassaei, from Instructables, is experimenting with 3D printing vinyl records. As you can see in the video below, she's using a super high-end machine, and the output is very limited for now (in both the amount of a song that can be produced and the quality -- which is not great), but it's not hard to imagine how this will improve over time:
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 3d printing, copyright
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
However, DRM will always fail to one thing or another. Consumer demand will kill anything that technological solutions hasn't. If you come up with a hack-proof DRM scheme, your product won't sell as well as it could.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And they would also have it so that they get first-sale on everything, making it illegal to sell second hand multimedia. Defend the rights of ReDigi until the very end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
More of your senseless ninnying.
A special talent: where the ordinary person would write "adverse publicity" and be understood...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Mike "Streisand Effect" Masnick makes you take a link and spend a minute JUST to learn HIS term!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Report and move on.
It's that easy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Blah, blah, blah....
Report and move on.
It's that easy.
---------------
Is your rabid "reporting" working? I don't think are enough of you doing it (or haven't got a quorum), and I'd like to have my comments made even more attractive cause everyone will want to see what's so horrible, and then when they find I'm reasonable, it undermines the site even more.
Even if not, ACs calling for knee-jerk clicking and "reporting" like a little Nazi who can't stand opposition to Glorious Leader is strong indication to the few chance readers not to waste their time here. Carry on, my unwitting minion: I don't at all want you regulars to shut up. You serve my purposes best by commenting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
I am also quite grateful when your posts are buried, not because I don't want to read opposing viewpoints, but because I don't have the time or energy to waste reading completely illogical, misinformed, often personal and obvious attacks that are at best non-sequitur and troll like.
Furthermore, it is blatantly obvious you have zero interest in having a discussion of the topic(s) and your only purpose is to troll, since it is the only way you can gain any sense of self worth, which is actually quite pathetic.
Frankly, I wish they would bury any thread reported from the point reported on, because I then would not be subjected to the responses either and it would not raise awareness of your posts by replying to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Wait, are you claiming to *be* Mike? That's a whole new level of nutty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Huh? You're the one who keeps spamming that link.
Wait, are you claiming to *be* Mike? That's a whole new level of nutty.
-----------------
My mockery is wasted on Mike's fanboy-trolls: I can't do better than the lack of comprehension exampled by this "AC".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
You're probably too young to remember just how close we were to losing our legal right to do that.
I imagine the same legal battle will be fought over 3D printers, only this time, they'll be prepared to fight it and will probably win.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
In any available medium IF you have a legal copy first"
So I can make legal copies of my DVDs and Blurays and put them on my local (home) network so I dont have to keep putting discs in my machines? Right? RIGHT?
A douchebag says what? (thats you)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, it's already NOT illegal to make copies for yourself.
Not really. You're right that it's legal to make personal use copies, but thanks to copyright law, it's not legal to break the DRM that's stopping you even if it's for a legal purpose.
Copyright law therefore draws the line well short of making copies for others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"it's not hard to imagine how this will improve over time:"
3D printing will never be much more than a toy just as regular printers and scanners were a fad now past. In theory you can reproduce books rather well, but in practice it's expensive and time-consuming. And that's just simply putting ink on paper, orders of magnitude less complex than anything 3D.
I have at hand a nice clock made by "Quartz", or at least that's the only branding on it besides "West Germany". Let's say that 3D printers advance to being able to make all of its PLASTIC parts, and let's say that all of its electronics and the few metal bits were available elsewhere so that I had a complete clock kit: now, how would the average dolt ever assemble it even with detailed instructions, and who would spend extra money and time just to make a standard clock? Same principle applies with everything: a few techno-geeks might build fairly large mechanical clocks (sort of: those require metal springs and are trickier to assemble and then have run accurately than you weenies think), and a few other attractive TOYS can be made. But 3D printing is never going to be an "anything machine", that's sheer imagination.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's not hard to imagine how this will improve over time:"
OOTB, you really don't get out much do you? Printers and scanners are not a 'fad', and are still quite regularly used to make copies of pages of books, and more often than you might think copies of entire books. Try looking in schools, just for a start.
If you knew anything at all about technology, 3D printing is used for many practical applications, such as modeling and mold making. And like the original Xerox what once was of poor quality and expensive becomes high quality and inexpensive.
Printers are used when the volume required is low, because the time and costs required for plate making and traditional printing a low volume is higher and slower than using a laser printer. The same is true for 3d printing. It is used when the volume required is low, or for prototyping.
" 3D printing is never going to be an "anything machine""
I don't think anyone claimed it would be. 3d printing IS a valid and valuable technology that has a number of uses, and 3d printing a record is a nearly perfect example of a use for a low volume. Practical reality is much closer than you imagine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's not hard to imagine how this will improve over time:"
The sheer amount of 'wrong' in your post is only exceeded by it's obviousness. Even a five year old has a better grasp of reality than you do, OOTB. Printers and scanners of all kinds are clearly not a fad considering you can find one or both in the vast majority of homes and businesses out there. There are three scanners and two printers just in my home alone. I'm a 3D artist and let me tell you there is definitely a huge demand for affordable printers which can take a 3D model from ones PC and turn it into something one can hold in their own two hands.
http://blog.objet.com/2012/08/07/the-incredible-hulk-and-john-carter-get-the-3d-printer-tr eatment/
http://www.nextengine.com/
There are two basic types by the way. One takes an empty space and fills it with a volume like the Objet and others. The other begins with a space already filled with a volume and sculpts it by grinding/cutting away material (which can be just about anything). In other words one is additive, the other subtractive. Both are used extensively in many areas of specialization, from mechanical engineering to medical prototyping to art and beyond. And not just statuettes regarding that last one, but things like props used in movies. Your only limitation is your imagination.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vXBXvYfeAk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzGh5xm NpAs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkUVURLkxS4
I would even include things like computer controlled plasma cutters to some extent since, much like my color laser printer, they're fed raw materials which they alter to create something the user wants. Doesn't matter whether it's paper and toner or plasma and high grade steel. The applications for all types of printers/scanners are endless and incredibly useful, so much so that they will never EVER go away.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YzGPUI9KVQ
If anything, the complete opposite of what you claim is what will really happen. They will improve, just like all technology does until replaced by something better, and inevitably become more affordable over time. A good example is the laser printer I mentioned. Invented in 1969, the first commercial application was in 1981 at a cost of $17,000.00 netting you a low resolution monochrome printing device. Today you can buy one that can print in color at high resolution for the low low price of $145.99 (a Hewlett Packard currently on sale at NCIX).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_printing
http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=75195&am p;vpn=CE918A%23BGJ&manufacture=HP%20Printers%20and%20Supplies&promoid=1033
Sheer imagination you say, OOTB? Every single creation mankind has made since the dawn of time began as nothing more than an imaginative dream. Yes, all of them. If it can be thought up, it can be created. The only limitation on whether an idea can be created or not comes down to how well we understand our physical universe, which just like it is always growing and expanding. All it takes is an open mind, something you clearly don't have and why you keep coming to all the wrong conclusions repeatedly.
I'll just close by saying there was a time when one had to employ a service bureau if they wanted anything scanned and/or printed. I know this because I used them extensively for my photography prior to the turn of the century. The devices required, especially if you needed high res and excellent quality, cost a fortune at the time. Eventually they got to a point where they were very compact, the cost was trivial (especially for a working pro), and they were out-resolving the film.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/KM5400II/KM5400IIA.HTM
http://www.epson.ca/cgi-bin/ ceStore/jsp/ProductCategory.do?oid=-16586
Now we're seeing the rise of the service bureaus once again, only this time for 3D. Can you honestly say with 100% certainty that the same pattern as before isn't going to happen? That owning a 3D scanner and 3D printer won't be affordable for everyone some day? If you say yes, you're lying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "it's not hard to imagine how this will improve over time:"
Because no modern office has any of these devices and they're never used on a daily basis by hundreds of millions of people? But, they're only a fad because a ridiculously impractical use you've cherry picked isn't something people do on a daily basis by most people (handily ignoring the hundreds of other uses that are, and which disrupt industries that existed before them quite easily)?
Yet again, I hope you're a parody or a deliberate troll, because I don't like the idea of someone this stupid having voting rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "it's not hard to imagine how this will improve over time:"
While I understand the sentiment, and it is a scary proposition that people such as OOTB can vote it is a necessary evil to allow everyone to vote. Unfortunately, there are entirely too many, who like OOTB do not look at things with logic and reasoning and who are unwilling to seek knowledge or facts before casting their ballots.
What is even more scary is that the internet seems to enbolden those unwilling to look at the facts and make reasoned decisions based on them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or, if you include TPB in it:
Is it illegal to give people a list of numbers that tell computers where to access other numbers that when put together tell a computer how to tell a machine to make an object that another machine can use to generate a signal that vibrates speakers to produce sounds similar to those someone has copyrighted?
Or, if you drag in the ISP:
Is it illegal to return a number that tells computers where to find a list of numbers and to translate requests from a computer through a series of computers that finally reaches a computer that will that tell computers where to access other numbers that when put together tell a computer how to tell a machine to make an object that another machine can use to generate a signal that vibrates speakers to produce sounds similar to those someone has copyrighted, and to then transmit arbitrary numbers back from that computer that has those lists back through a series of computers to the computer that made the request in the first place?
Man, technology is CRAZY.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Hopefully not the power companies, but I suppose there have been sillier lawsuits.
The sequences of numbers themselves are de facto illegal, since copyright infringement is illegal, and the infringing files are just many, many digits of hexadecimal/binary numbers. Kind of mind-warping to think that certain very large numbers are illegal, and you can be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for writing them down.
I suppose that makes pirates rogue mathematicians?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
As for certain numbers being de facto illegal, yes that was the whole point, but moreover the emphasis on that was because that is insane.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Excellent advice and done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/aspiring-gun-maker-3d-printer-revoked-plans-p rint-firearms-article-1.1173583
Stratasys repossessed a leased printer and Indiegogo booted the project from crowdsourcing funds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not ahead of the laws
No, not really. The medium should be irrelevant. I can copy an LP, a tape, a CD, an MP3, and whatever the next great thing is, but whether it's infringing doesn't depend on which of those it is, or on whether I use a 3D printer or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not ahead of the laws
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not ahead of the laws
Take the example in the article - in the UK, you pay a levy on CDR's that is supposed to basically license you to make legal personal copies. Her 3D printer has no associated levy - so it could be found to be infringing when copying a CD is not.
In addition, you are looking at an example where there are currently IP laws already attached in some way. What about copying a chair? In the US at least, it is perfectly legal to copy the design of a chair and build another one. Will it be illegal to scan and copy one with out 3D printer?
Staples has started a pilot program (I think the the Netherlands) where they are putting 3D printers in their stores and you can send them a design to print and go pick it up. How do IP laws apply to someone who wants to print a replacement part for something that they would have previously have had to purchase from the manufacturer? What if I want to print a replacement emblem for a car I am rebuilding?
As these printers get better and cheaper, they are going to wreak havoc in the manufacturing and shipping industries. It will not be long before someone lobbies for a law that you have to walk in front of your 3D printer waiving flags.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Open the pod bay doors, HAL".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's simple, really
It's only a matter of time before they wage war against 3D printers. Anything which gives the public the means to create must be inherently criminal in nature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Man, that's funny...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
allow me to tell you it s a niche market big corps
have given up many years ago -which is kewl by the way-
(look at the customs rate for 12",,no rate).
For other things, like sneakers etc;
then it s a diff story and for sure disruption will h4ppened...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
3-d gun printing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Next disruption might be done by replicators.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Record copy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I want a 3D printed mp3 player
[ link to this | view in chronology ]