Fwd: Intellectual Property & the Future of @Home Manufacturing

[Bryan Bishop]

From: Adam B. Levine <adamlevi...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 5:25 PM
Subject: [thingiverse] Intellectual Property & the Future of @Home Manufacturing
To: thing...@googlegroups.com


Hi Everyone,
I've got a post up at MAKEzine talking about (among other things) intellectual property, additive manufacturing, and thingiverse

you can read it here.
http://blog.makezine.com/2013/03/21/intellectual-property-and-the-future-of-home-manufacturing/

Thanks!

Adam B. Levine

--
--
Go visit thingiverse at http://thingiverse.com and stay tuned to the blog at http://blog.thingiverse.com.
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "thingiverse" group.
To post to this group, send email to thing...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
thingiverse...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/thingiverse?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "thingiverse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to thingiverse...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 


--
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507

[Bryan Bishop]

From: Glenn Beer <gkb...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:26 PM
Subject: [thingiverse] Re: Intellectual Property & the Future of @Home Manufacturing
To: thing...@googlegroups.com


quote:

" except there the $1 sent to the generated bitcoin address would be split up and distributed to all the contributors, based on a diminishing returns algorithm. "

Diminishing returns for the original or the Incremental changes? Gratuitous changes could become very popular.

It will be very tough to arbitrate the earned value of an incremental change. 

[christoph...@gmail.com]

This a great start for a devshare algorithm, but Bryan makes a good point:

> Diminishing returns for the original or the Incremental changes? Gratuitous changes could become very popular.

I've been trying to work out some sort of voting scheme; where new contributions would be rated by existing contributors or other stake holders (like makers or users), and then a contributor's share of the allocated devshare would be proportional to the recency of their contributions as well as their perceived value to the community.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Manufacturing" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openmanufactur...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openmanu...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en.

[Bryan Bishop]

On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:11 PM, christoph...@gmail.com <christoph...@gmail.com> wrote:

This a great start for a devshare algorithm, but Bryan makes a good point:

I have made no points or written anything in this thread. Maybe you are misreading ?

[Adam Levine]

I believe he meant Glenn, not Bryan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Glenn Beer <gkb...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM
Subject: [thingiverse] Re: Intellectual Property & the Future of @Home Manufacturing
To: thing...@googlegroups.com


quote:

" except there the $1 sent to the generated bitcoin address would be split up and distributed to all the contributors, based on a diminishing returns algorithm. "

Diminishing returns for the original or the Incremental changes? Gratuitous changes could become very popular.

It will be very tough to arbitrate the earned value of an incremental change.

Adam B. Levine
Writer - Curator - Designer
http://MindToMatter.org
The Minufacturist
The Daily Bitcoin
The Daily Exposure

--

[Michael Weinberg]

Hi Adam.  What do you do about non-party copiers?  Even if we assume, for the sake of argument at least, that the underlying system works, what compels people to participate in it?  If we're talking about a non-patented functional object, if I am not a party to your contract but print your piece anyway there isn't a lot you can do about it.  Does that make this an elaborate discretionary tipping system?  If so, why not just use flattr or something?

I'm not sure that this is a problem, or that if it is that it is a fatal one, but I'm curious how you would handle it.

And sorry about all of the multi-clause sentences.  End-of-the-week writing is not always elegant.

-michael

--

Michael Weinberg
Vice President
Public Knowledge
@mweinbergPK

1818 N Street, NW, Suite 410
Washington, DC 20036
202-861-0020
Washington, D.C.  20009
www.publicknowledge.org

[Adam Levine]

Hi Michael,
Ultimately the system is voluntary - Designs are data, and data is functionally free to transmit, so there's a limit to what you can do about that.

I think that's why it's so important to keep prices low, and to have other parts of the service which add value (for example giving you a .gcode version specifically tailored for your printer).

To further dis-incentivize piracy I'd like to see advertisement supported downloads, with a small 1x1 brand printing in a user customizable area of the item (parameters set by the advertiser) - Then there is no cost to the end user, and the advertiser gets branding on something permanent instead of the usual disposables.

I will respond in more length later, about to record the first episode of The Daily Bitcoin podcast.
Also, you might be interested in my latest article releasing later today entitled "The New Renaissance: How #Bitcoin Millionaires will change the world"
An audio reading by the author (me) is available under an open source license here https://soundcloud.com/mindtomatter/the-new-renaissance-how

Thanks,

Adam B. Levine
Writer - Curator - Designer
http://MindToMatter.org
The Minufacturist
The Daily Bitcoin
The Daily Exposure