What was heavily underexposed in the hoist around the home-printed gun, is the use of the 3D printer on almost all areas that do not have weapons.
Now that a functional weapon has been created using a 3D printer for the first time. So, everyone seems to be concerned about criminal applications of this technology. However, the power of three-dimensional printing in other areas is much less waking.
It was like world news, In USA, law student and gun fan Cody Wilson managed to manufacture a fully functional gun using the power of the 3D printer negatively. When he threw the source files on the internet, the fence was completely from the dam. From now on, anyone with some computer knowledge and access to a 3D printer from home from his own weapon factory could begin.
The news led to distressed comments in the newspapers and on the Internet. Afterwards, those same newspapers tried to make us feel comfortable.
The conventional law in any civilized country prohibits the “manufacture of prohibited weapons” without prior authorization. But the argument that still remains infinitely much easier to get weapons in the black circuit for the time being was still safe. Discussion closed and on to something else, it seemed.
However, what was heavily underexposed in the hoist around the home-printed gun, is the power of the 3D printer. Which is almost on all areas that do not have weapons.
3D in the living room
Three-dimensional printing may have been used for almost thirty years in industry, yet the application in other areas still sounds like future music in the ears for many people. However, the question is not whether we will soon have access to the design and printing of our own objects. But when technology will truly break into the living room.
It all sounds very appealing. For example, if your washing machine filters the mind, just browse the manufacturer’s website to download the matching 3D model. Then print a new filter. That seems to be a great idea in a way that the consumer can only benefit from. Nevertheless, in practice, an important issue arises soon: the copyright.
In the Benelux, anyone who wishes to have a three-dimensional design can register under the so-called model of designs. A prerequisite for this is that it is about a new product. For example, if anyone tries to patent the wheel, it will most probably take bone. The boundary of what may or may not, however, is difficult to draw. If you measure yourself the broken table leg of your IKEA side table, imitate a 3D program and print it yourself, you are in your right. That’s exactly the same as someone who buys a wooden bar from the hardware shop and then drops to the right length. It is only when an object contains a unique element, that there may be intellectual property.
However, it will soon become much easier to copy unique, complex objects themselves. The question then is whether it would be useful to protect them. For example, in the fashion industry, there is only exclusivity on the brand logo, not on the design of the item itself. Nevertheless, the fashion houses do not suffer so much while copying their pieces. It is the buyer to do the originality. This view could also cut wood in the model right.
The use of the 3D printer for creating weapons will not change the world. A restriction to criminal applications would harm the technology. All other conceivable objects may, however, make a difference.
Thanks a lot for your time. Hope you have enjoyed reading the article ‘The use of the 3D printer is unanimous’