POSTED BY Nicholas Hasenfus

3D printers can be used to created objects out of materials such as metal, plastic, and nylon.  With a 3D scanner or 3D blueprints and a 3D printer, homeowners are able to create common household objects.  3D printers work differently than traditional machining techniques because printing is achieved using an additive process, adding layers of material, while traditional machining works by removing material.  Although the first working 3D printer was manufactured in 1984, recently prices have dropped for 3D printers and could be a nightmare to existing intellectual property (IP) laws as an Inside Counsel story has reported.

Traditionally, manufactures have been able to protect their products by copyrights, trade protection, and patents.  3D scanners and 3D printers have the potential to make this protection irrelevant especially to smaller companies who are unlikely to have all of these protections in place.  Even if they did have protection, if a person only infringed on one or two items at a time, it will make little economic sense.   3D printers may also pose a threat to the public.  Plans were developed by a United Stated group to provide a 3D blueprint of a working plastic firearm.  After they were posted online, the U.S. State department forced the group to take them down.  3D printing of firearms would allow unauthorized possessors of firearms across the United States and in countries where all firearms are illegal.

There are several ways IP owners may still be able to find protection.  Some of these include keeping the innovation cycle far ahead of the time it would take to develop 3D blueprints, therefore making consumers eager to have the newest items.  Another way to find protection is to offer an authorized blueprint so owners of 3D printers can created the end product and the IP owner would still be receiving revenue.   Copyright owners may also be able to use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) against people offering to 3D print goods.

It seems like these solutions would still not protect the public from unauthorized use of 3D plans.  People who were unable to legally obtain a firearm could likely go online and illegally find 3D blueprints of firearms just as easily as they can download music of videos illegally.  Congress will need to be extremely forward thinking and try to come up with a solution to these issues before they become a massive problem.