Skip to search.

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

×Close this window

diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication · DIY 3D Printing and Fabrication

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

  • Members: 1625
  • Category: Robotics
  • Founded: Jul 22, 2008
  • Language: English
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Message search is now enhanced, find messages faster. Take it for a spin.

Messages

Advanced
Messages Help
Messages 7709 - 7738 of 8762   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Messages: Show Message Summaries Sort by Date ^  
#7709 From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
Date: Thu Nov 22, 2012 6:13 pm
Subject: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
eexgs
Send Email Send Email
 

On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:
But, if formlabs is not doing this partial cure trick, then it seems the
whole suit
is invalid, just my reading of it.

That's what it seems to me too

Graham

#7710 From: "dead1eaf" <jasoncstone@...>
Date: Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:38 pm
Subject: Re: laser printer
dead1eaf
Send Email Send Email
 
I know this is a little off topic, but how do you think the DWS printers
separate the part from the resin tray? It doesn't look like a slide or a tilt is
going on.

All the best,
Jason

#7711 From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
Date: Thu Nov 22, 2012 9:06 pm
Subject: Re: Re: laser printer
eexgs
Send Email Send Email
 
I think it has a small flexible window at least for the small printer, this works fine for smallcross-sectionparts I think

Graham

On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 8:38 PM, dead1eaf <jasoncstone@...> wrote:

I know this is a little off topic, but how do you think the DWS printers separate the part from the resin tray? It doesn't look like a slide or a tilt is going on.

All the best,
Jason



#7712 From: "pzamov" <pzamov@...>
Date: Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:00 pm
Subject: Re: laser printer
pzamov
Send Email Send Email
 
DWS (Blueray laser)Does a lift off and a dip down in the resin. There is no
tilt/slice/vibrate.
It is simply up and down. Up and down with a DLP and you end up under the
En....tech patent.

Cheers!
Peter


--- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "dead1eaf"
<jasoncstone@...> wrote:
>
> I know this is a little off topic, but how do you think the DWS printers
separate the part from the resin tray? It doesn't look like a slide or a tilt is
going on.
>
> All the best,
> Jason
>

#7713 From: "pzamov" <pzamov@...>
Date: Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:02 pm
Subject: Re: laser printer
pzamov
Send Email Send Email
 
Their VAT is Solid Acrylic/Perspex/Plexiglass/Lexan...
It does have a coating of some sort ( PDMS? ) that goes milky white after some
usage. and you rotate the VAT 90 degrees- that way you have 4x the uses of the
VAT.

Peter

--- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, Graham Stabler
<grezmos@...> wrote:
>
> I think it has a small flexible window at least for the small printer, this
> works fine for small cross-section parts I think
>
> Graham
>
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 8:38 PM, dead1eaf <jasoncstone@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I know this is a little off topic, but how do you think the DWS printers
> > separate the part from the resin tray? It doesn't look like a slide or a
> > tilt is going on.
> >
> > All the best,
> > Jason
> >
> >
> >
>

#7714 From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:02 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
internetgiest
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi Everyone,

I have been reading and I will post this again.

I have a number of patents and patents pending...

The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.

That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.

It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.

Kevin I.


From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...



If you profit from it financially then you infringe, otherwise it is OK

Graham


On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Fortino <jolly_craft@...> wrote:
 
I am just wondering how patent can affect DIY ? If it is patented, then we can't copy it?
Or is it ok as long as we do not make commercial of it? What is the boundary here?

Can someone shed a light?

Thanks

Fortino





#7715 From: steven Mitchell <smitchel@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:39 pm
Subject: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
skm1099
Send Email Send Email
 

>I am just wondering how patent can affect DIY ? If it is patented, then we can't copy it?
>Or is it ok as long as we do not make commercial of it? What is the boundary here?
>
>
>Can someone shed a light?
>
>
>Thanks
>
>
>Fortino



There is no exclusion for personal use in the patent laws,
even though that is commonly believed.

There is an exclusion for (I'm not sure exact wording here) development and
research, but that really is a stretch for DIY use.  In many cases you would be
liable for infringement anyway--just my opinion.



#7716 From: "pzamov" <pzamov@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:04 pm
Subject: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
pzamov
Send Email Send Email
 
@group
I believe there is an exception: building a patented item only for proving the
patent claim. ;-) Not even universities are allowed, although it is very common
there. In the jewelry biz there is a thing called 10% - make it at least 10%
different and it is a new design.
You can say you were inspired by...so and so.

Peter

--- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, steven Mitchell
<smitchel@...> wrote:
>
>
>  >I am just wondering how patent can affect DIY ? If it is patented,
> then we can't copy it?
>  >Or is it ok as long as we do not make commercial of it? What is the
> boundary here?
>  >
>  >
>  >Can someone shed a light?
>  >
>  >
>  >Thanks
>  >
>  >
>  >Fortino
>
>
<mailto:internetgiest@...?subject=Re%3A%20patents%3F%20You%20haven%27t%20seen%20\
anything%20yet%2E%2E%2E>
>
> There is no exclusion for personal use in the patent laws,
> even though that is commonly believed.
>
> There is an exclusion for (I'm not sure exact wording here) development and
> research, but that really is a stretch for DIY use.  In many cases you
> would be
> liable for infringement anyway--just my opinion.
>
>
>
<mailto:internetgiest@...?subject=Re%3A%20patents%3F%20You%20haven%27t%20seen%20\
anything%20yet%2E%2E%2E>
>

#7717 From: "HottGal0" <smrazrak@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:24 pm
Subject: z450 firmware problem
smrazrak
Send Email Send Email
 
hello dears
i have z450 3d printer from zcorp, and suddenly with no reason it doesn't start
up and the lCD illuminated but blank, when i connect the electronic box to the
monitor, it gives the bellow error message:

"warning kernel.346060: application: ELCFU.EXE not found on disk.
fatal error kernel.146040: nowaithost specified but no application present.
setting run mode to WAITHOST.
Ready for debugger commands."

can anybody help fix this problem?
Thanks for your co-operation

#7718 From: Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:43 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
lizardman200...
Send Email Send Email
 
I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you infringe or you don't infringe particular claims. You make direct comparison of the claim language with the alleged infringing elements and demonstrate that it does or does not infringe. The patent you download only tell part of the story however, and there is a file wrapper in the patent office for each patent, and that carries the back and forth with the patent examiner over the meaning of claims, clarifications, etc...  and may in fact may narrow the interpretation of a claim significantly. This can be done by limiting field of use for instance or arguing why your claim does not mean the same thing as some previous patent claim. Percentages are irrelevant, and I would steer clear of any lawyer giving that advice.
 

--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...> wrote:

From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: "diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com" <diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 6:02 AM

 

Hi Everyone,

I have been reading and I will post this again.

I have a number of patents and patents pending...

The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.

That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.

It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.

Kevin I.


From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...



If you profit from it financially then you infringe, otherwise it is OK

Graham


On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Fortino <jolly_craft@...> wrote:
 
I am just wondering how patent can affect DIY ? If it is patented, then we can't copy it?
Or is it ok as long as we do not make commercial of it? What is the boundary here?

Can someone shed a light?

Thanks

Fortino





#7719 From: "matthewof1989" <mharri6@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 5:42 pm
Subject: water clear resin
matthewof1989
Send Email Send Email
 
Hello Group!

My name is Matthew and this is my first post.

I want to use a dlp 3dp with water clear resin but I hear that it is difficult
to control the way that the light is projected into the the resin bath. Does
anyone know any detail about this?

Also, since dying the resin is recommend, I was wonder if there is a dye that
changes to clear once it has been exposed to uv light for an extended amount of
time.

Any information is helpful

Thank You!

#7720 From: "matthewof1989" <mharri6@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 5:49 pm
Subject: Re: water clear resin
matthewof1989
Send Email Send Email
 
here are two examples of what I would like to achieve.

http://objet.com/3d-printing-materials/transparent

http://www.dsm.com/en_US/somos/public/home/pages/offerings-somos-water-clear.jsp


--- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "matthewof1989"
<mharri6@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Group!
>
> My name is Matthew and this is my first post.
>
> I want to use a dlp 3dp with water clear resin but I hear that it is difficult
to control the way that the light is projected into the the resin bath. Does
anyone know any detail about this?
>
> Also, since dying the resin is recommend, I was wonder if there is a dye that
changes to clear once it has been exposed to uv light for an extended amount of
time.
>
> Any information is helpful
>
> Thank You!
>

#7721 From: "Boman33" <boman33@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:25 pm
Subject: RE: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
bertho_boman
Send Email Send Email
 

I echo Mike’s comments below.  Nothing about %.  Read the claims extremely carefully and understand them.  That is what counts.

Bertho

 

From:  Mike Polcyn   Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:43

 

I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you infringe or you don't infringe particular claims. You make direct comparison of the claim language with the alleged infringing elements and demonstrate that it does or does not infringe. The patent you download only tell part of the story however, and there is a file wrapper in the patent office for each patent, and that carries the back and forth with the patent examiner over the meaning of claims, clarifications, etc...  and may in fact may narrow the interpretation of a claim significantly. This can be done by limiting field of use for instance or arguing why your claim does not mean the same thing as some previous patent claim. Percentages are irrelevant, and I would steer clear of any lawyer giving that advice.
 

--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...> wrote:


From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: "diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com" <diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 6:02 AM

 

Hi Everyone,

 

I have been reading and I will post this again.

 

I have a number of patents and patents pending...

 

The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.

 

That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.

 

It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.

 

Kevin I.

 

.


#7722 From: Jon Elson <elson@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 8:36 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
jmelson2
Send Email Send Email
 
Mike Polcyn wrote:
>
>
> I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law
> as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement
> claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you
> infringe or you don't infringe particular claims.
>
OK, one thing to remember is the PTO handles both design patents and
innovation
patents.  The innovation or invention patents involve claims bearing on
procedures,
processes and functions.  The design patents involve design elements
like shapes,
colors, fonts and similar things.  So, the Nike "swoosh" and the shape
of the
old Coke bottle are design patents, and the claim is the physical object.
Defending design patents is very different from the other type.
Jewelry patterns would also come under the design type.

Jon

#7723 From: Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 11:31 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
lizardman200...
Send Email Send Email
 
Thanks Jon, My comments were regarding utility patents... which is what I thought we were discussing here...

from the patent office website (below)


The Difference Between Design and Utility Patents

In general terms, a “utility patent” protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171). Both design and utility patents may be obtained on an article if invention resides both in its utility and ornamental appearance. While utility and design patents afford legally separate protection, the utility and ornamentality of an article are not easily separable. Articles of manufacture may possess both functional and ornamental characteristics.




--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:

From: Jon Elson <elson@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 2:36 PM

 

Mike Polcyn wrote:
>
>
> I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law
> as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement
> claims. The bottom line is that "Claim Language" is binary; you
> infringe or you don't infringe particular claims.
>
OK, one thing to remember is the PTO handles both design patents and
innovation
patents. The innovation or invention patents involve claims bearing on
procedures,
processes and functions. The design patents involve design elements
like shapes,
colors, fonts and similar things. So, the Nike "swoosh" and the shape
of the
old Coke bottle are design patents, and the claim is the physical object.
Defending design patents is very different from the other type.
Jewelry patterns would also come under the design type.

Jon


#7724 From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
Date: Sat Nov 24, 2012 11:58 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
eexgs
Send Email Send Email
 
There was earlier reference tojewelleryby someone else.

Graham

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...> wrote:

Thanks Jon, My comments were regarding utility patents... which is what I thought we were discussing here...

from the patent office website (below)


The Difference Between Design and Utility Patents

In general terms, a utility patent protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171). Both design and utility patents may be obtained on an article if invention resides both in its utility and ornamental appearance. While utility and design patents afford legally separate protection, the utility and ornamentality of an article are not easily separable. Articles of manufacture may possess both functional and ornamental characteristics.




--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:

From: Jon Elson <elson@...>

Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 2:36 PM


Mike Polcyn wrote:
>
>
> I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law
> as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement
> claims. The bottom line is that "Claim Language" is binary; you
> infringe or you don't infringe particular claims.
>
OK, one thing to remember is the PTO handles both design patents and
innovation
patents. The innovation or invention patents involve claims bearing on
procedures,
processes and functions. The design patents involve design elements
like shapes,
colors, fonts and similar things. So, the Nike "swoosh" and the shape
of the
old Coke bottle are design patents, and the claim is the physical object.
Defending design patents is very different from the other type.
Jewelry patterns would also come under the design type.

Jon



#7725 From: Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:07 am
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
lizardman200...
Send Email Send Email
 
Thanks Graham... by bad... not following the thread closely enough I guess.
M


--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Graham Stabler <grezmos@...> wrote:

From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 5:58 PM

 

There was earlier reference to jewellery by someone else.


Graham

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...> wrote:
 

Thanks Jon, My comments were regarding utility patents... which is what I thought we were discussing here...

from the patent office website (below)


The Difference Between Design and Utility Patents

In general terms, a “utility patent” protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171). Both design and utility patents may be obtained on an article if invention resides both in its utility and ornamental appearance. While utility and design patents afford legally separate protection, the utility and ornamentality of an article are not easily separable. Articles of manufacture may possess both functional and ornamental characteristics.




--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:

From: Jon Elson <elson@...>

Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 2:36 PM


 

Mike Polcyn wrote:
>
>
> I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law
> as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement
> claims. The bottom line is that "Claim Language" is binary; you
> infringe or you don't infringe particular claims.
>
OK, one thing to remember is the PTO handles both design patents and
innovation
patents. The innovation or invention patents involve claims bearing on
procedures,
processes and functions. The design patents involve design elements
like shapes,
colors, fonts and similar things. So, the Nike "swoosh" and the shape
of the
old Coke bottle are design patents, and the claim is the physical object.
Defending design patents is very different from the other type.
Jewelry patterns would also come under the design type.

Jon



#7726 From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:09 am
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
eexgs
Send Email Send Email
 
Althoughto be honest we have had several on the same topic so I might be wrong :)

Graham


On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...> wrote:

Thanks Graham... by bad... not following the thread closely enough I guess.
M


--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Graham Stabler <grezmos@...> wrote:

From: Graham Stabler <grezmos@...>

Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 5:58 PM


There was earlier reference tojewelleryby someone else.


Graham

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mike Polcyn <lizardman2000@...> wrote:

Thanks Jon, My comments were regarding utility patents... which is what I thought we were discussing here...

from the patent office website (below)


The Difference Between Design and Utility Patents

In general terms, a utility patent protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171). Both design and utility patents may be obtained on an article if invention resides both in its utility and ornamental appearance. While utility and design patents afford legally separate protection, the utility and ornamentality of an article are not easily separable. Articles of manufacture may possess both functional and ornamental characteristics.




--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Jon Elson <elson@...> wrote:

From: Jon Elson <elson@...>

Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 2:36 PM


Mike Polcyn wrote:
>
>
> I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law
> as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement
> claims. The bottom line is that "Claim Language" is binary; you
> infringe or you don't infringe particular claims.
>
OK, one thing to remember is the PTO handles both design patents and
innovation
patents. The innovation or invention patents involve claims bearing on
procedures,
processes and functions. The design patents involve design elements
like shapes,
colors, fonts and similar things. So, the Nike "swoosh" and the shape
of the
old Coke bottle are design patents, and the claim is the physical object.
Defending design patents is very different from the other type.
Jewelry patterns would also come under the design type.

Jon




#7727 From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:41 am
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
internetgiest
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi,

If that was the case ever software company in the world that use's Microsoft's .NET platform for making their software could sue every other company that use's the .NET platform because you would be infringing on each others internal code in the software.

I have lived and make money with my patent attorney, if you don't want to listen don't. Go play attorney and get your butt handed to you.

I built machine's that according to you Bertho infringe on Zcorp and just about every other machine out there... I haven't seen one lawsuit, I have two patents with a third coming. So, I think the money talks and the rest walks.

I've tried to get this point across and hopefully people think about facts.

I won't post again about this subject, amateurs.

Kevin I.


From: Boman33 <boman33@...>
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:25 AM
Subject: RE: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...



I echo Mike’s comments below.  Nothing about %.  Read the claims extremely carefully and understand them.  That is what counts.
Bertho
 
From:  Mike Polcyn   Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:43

 
I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you infringe or you don't infringe particular claims. You make direct comparison of the claim language with the alleged infringing elements and demonstrate that it does or does not infringe. The patent you download only tell part of the story however, and there is a file wrapper in the patent office for each patent, and that carries the back and forth with the patent examiner over the meaning of claims, clarifications, etc...  and may in fact may narrow the interpretation of a claim significantly. This can be done by limiting field of use for instance or arguing why your claim does not mean the same thing as some previous patent claim. Percentages are irrelevant, and I would steer clear of any lawyer giving that advice.
 

--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...> wrote:

From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: "diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com" <diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 6:02 AM
 
Hi Everyone,
 
I have been reading and I will post this again.
 
I have a number of patents and patents pending...
 
The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.
 
That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.
 
It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.
 
Kevin I.
 
.





#7728 From: "Lino" <creaturemaker@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:54 am
Subject: RE: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
creaturemake...
Send Email Send Email
 

wow

 

From: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com [mailto:diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Impson
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 6:41 PM
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...

 

 

Hi,

If that was the case ever software company in the world that use's Microsoft's .NET platform for making their software could sue every other company that use's the .NET platform because you would be infringing on each others internal code in the software.

I have lived and make money with my patent attorney, if you don't want to listen don't. Go play attorney and get your butt handed to you.

I built machine's that according to you Bertho infringe on Zcorp and just about every other machine out there... I haven't seen one lawsuit, I have two patents with a third coming. So, I think the money talks and the rest walks.

I've tried to get this point across and hopefully people think about facts.

 

I won't post again about this subject, amateurs.

 

Kevin I.

 


From: Boman33 <boman33@...>
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:25 AM
Subject: RE: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...

 

 

I echo Mike’s comments below.  Nothing about %.  Read the claims extremely carefully and understand them.  That is what counts.

Bertho

 

From:  Mike Polcyn   Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:43

 

I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you infringe or you don't infringe particular claims. You make direct comparison of the claim language with the alleged infringing elements and demonstrate that it does or does not infringe. The patent you download only tell part of the story however, and there is a file wrapper in the patent office for each patent, and that carries the back and forth with the patent examiner over the meaning of claims, clarifications, etc...  and may in fact may narrow the interpretation of a claim significantly. This can be done by limiting field of use for instance or arguing why your claim does not mean the same thing as some previous patent claim. Percentages are irrelevant, and I would steer clear of any lawyer giving that advice.
 

--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...> wrote:


From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: "diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com" <diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 6:02 AM

 

Hi Everyone,

 

I have been reading and I will post this again.

 

I have a number of patents and patents pending...

 

The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.

 

That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.

 

It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.

 

Kevin I.

 

.

 

 


#7729 From: "Boman33" <boman33@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:58 am
Subject: RE: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
bertho_boman
Send Email Send Email
 

Kevin,

I have many patents but I do not to brag about it.

That you have not been sued might indicate that the big companies thinks your products are insignificant.

True, I am not a lawyer and I do not claim to be one.

 

And you are right, it does not do any good to argue about it.  We each have our own opinion and it is up to other people to be careful.

Take Care,

Bertho

 

From:  Kevin Impson   Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 21:41

Hi,

If that was the case ever software company in the world that use's Microsoft's .NET platform for making their software could sue every other company that use's the .NET platform because you would be infringing on each others internal code in the software.

I have lived and make money with my patent attorney, if you don't want to listen don't. Go play attorney and get your butt handed to you.

I built machine's that according to you Bertho infringe on Zcorp and just about every other machine out there... I haven't seen one lawsuit, I have two patents with a third coming. So, I think the money talks and the rest walks.

I've tried to get this point across and hopefully people think about facts.

 

I won't post again about this subject, amateurs.

 

Kevin I.

 


From: Boman33 <boman33@...>
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:25 AM
Subject: RE: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...

 

 

I echo Mike’s comments below.  Nothing about %.  Read the claims extremely carefully and understand them.  That is what counts.

Bertho

 

From:  Mike Polcyn   Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:43

 

I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you infringe or you don't infringe particular claims. You make direct comparison of the claim language with the alleged infringing elements and demonstrate that it does or does not infringe. The patent you download only tell part of the story however, and there is a file wrapper in the patent office for each patent, and that carries the back and forth with the patent examiner over the meaning of claims, clarifications, etc...  and may in fact may narrow the interpretation of a claim significantly. This can be done by limiting field of use for instance or arguing why your claim does not mean the same thing as some previous patent claim. Percentages are irrelevant, and I would steer clear of any lawyer giving that advice.
 

--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...> wrote:


From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: "diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com" <diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 6:02 AM

 

Hi Everyone,

 

I have been reading and I will post this again.

 

I have a number of patents and patents pending...

 

The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.

 

That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.

 

It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.

 

Kevin I.

 

.


#7730 From: "bobgarrish" <bobgarrish@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 3:45 am
Subject: Re: water clear resin
bobgarrish
Send Email Send Email
 
The Objet printers have an advantage in this because they only spray out resin
which is to be cured (ie: part of the part) into the area their lights can hit. 
In the case of DLP or SLA, there's a whole lot of 'bystander' resin in the line
of fire.

Not sure about the other company's tech, but what I can say is that we'd need a
transparent UV blocker to make it work with projectors.  I'm pretty sure such
things exist, since you can get UV-blocking acrylic which is still clear, but I
don't know what they're called nor how to acquire them.

--- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "matthewof1989"
<mharri6@...> wrote:
>
> here are two examples of what I would like to achieve.
>
> http://objet.com/3d-printing-materials/transparent
>
>
http://www.dsm.com/en_US/somos/public/home/pages/offerings-somos-water-clear.jsp
>
>
> --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "matthewof1989"
<mharri6@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Group!
> >
> > My name is Matthew and this is my first post.
> >
> > I want to use a dlp 3dp with water clear resin but I hear that it is
difficult to control the way that the light is projected into the the resin
bath. Does anyone know any detail about this?
> >
> > Also, since dying the resin is recommend, I was wonder if there is a dye
that changes to clear once it has been exposed to uv light for an extended
amount of time.
> >
> > Any information is helpful
> >
> > Thank You!
> >
>

#7731 From: Jon Elson <elson@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 4:32 am
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
jmelson2
Send Email Send Email
 
Mike Polcyn wrote:
>
> Thanks Jon, My comments were regarding utility patents... which is
> what I thought we were discussing here...
>
Yes, I used the wrong word, utility is the one.  Up until the comments
about 30% difference came up, yes, that's what I thought, too.  30% of
an idea has no meaning, so that's when I thought to mention the difference
between utility and design patents.  But, clearly the suit over the 3DS /
formlabs situation involves a utility patent, and 30% change of the
basic concept of the 3D printing process doesn't, at least to me, have
any definable meaning.

Jon

#7732 From: Jon Elson <elson@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 4:37 am
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
jmelson2
Send Email Send Email
 
Boman33 wrote:
>
> Kevin,
>
> And you are right, it does not do any good to argue about it.  We each
> have our own opinion and it is up to other people to be careful
>
Really, only what the judge and jury think about the arguments given make
any difference, the rest is speculation.  And, suits often turn out to have
a big surprise.  Unfortunately, we may be lucky to even have an answer
by the end of 2013 on this one.

Jon

#7733 From: "Paolo Velcich" <pavel@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:38 am
Subject: RE: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
pavel59
Send Email Send Email
 

Yes, 30% of an innovation (invention) patent has no meaning. That "31%" rule might [eventually] apply to a design/ornamental patent.

 

I'm not sure that it will necessarily take one year to clear the suit, this last one seems to be quite weak, or more an intimidating action than a strong one.

However, it appears that 3DS try to keep the market frozen by saturating it with patents.

They may succeed for a period and on certain field of application but sooner or later the market wins.

 

Companies should focus on products, innovation, quality and customer satisfaction (which is the sum of the three plus good post sales assistance).

Several companies forgot most of those components of the mix and focus only on the finance. Stock options are all what counts.

3DS in my opinion is following this path and the patenting policy is part of the strategy. Companies acquisition is another component of the same strategy. They're constantly looking at Nasdaq.   That's their problem.

 

Look at Apple. They built (actually re-built) a reputation on products and innovation. Stock options came later. During the Sculley era they were doing exactly the contrary, and miserably failing.

 

I'm not sure they will be able to keep the pace or how long [in absence of Jobs] but at least they're getting out of the patents war.

 

In my much smaller world, I also have customers [companies] almost exclusively looking at the finance, forgetting all the good things they've the potential to develop. And they're investing all capitals in standard products fighting for peanuts [ridiculously low profit] in a very competitive mass market. That's crazy. These companies are always hyper-stressed and on the edge of fail while they could live much more comfortably in a higher profit niche market.

 

Fact is that someone already throw the stone in the water, and now people [the market] is aware there's no reason to pay 80,000 USD instead of 2,500 [if not 1,000] USD for a 3D printer.

Maybe it will not happen this year, but someone will come out on the market with a mass produced 3D Printer at an affordable price and 3DS will crash.

Because they're not minded and structured to compete on that market.

 

I'm not even sure they [3DS] didn't suit Mike just because the lower amount of his KS campaign. It's not in their mentality [to sue only rich competitors]. They have to defend their boundaries, that's in the stock rules.

That may mean a couple of things. The boundaries they can protect from infringement are now very thin and frail, so thin Mike's solution was already OUT and Form 1 "might" be a little IN, or [second option] they're really scared that too many affordable solutions breaking free on the market would cut the grass beneath their feet.

 

Also, without depowering Mike's solution, Form 1 was a much more industrialized product and  was backed by a solid and reputable institution like the MIT Labs.  A totally different threat to them.

 

Just my opinion of course.

 

Paolo

 

 

From: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com [mailto:diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jon Elson
Sent: domenica 25 novembre 2012 08:37
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...

 

 

Boman33 wrote:
>
> Kevin,
>
> And you are right, it does not do any good to argue about it. We each
> have our own opinion and it is up to other people to be careful
>
Really, only what the judge and jury think about the arguments given make
any difference, the rest is speculation. And, suits often turn out to have
a big surprise. Unfortunately, we may be lucky to even have an answer
by the end of 2013 on this one.

Jon


#7734 From: Fernando Muiz <spacecaptain@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:36 pm
Subject: Re: Re: water clear resin
fernando.inbox
Send Email Send Email
 
There are indeed ways to produce clear(ish) resins that would work with visible light printers, but the artefacts that arise when trying to print layer after layer, without the usage of a depth control pigment or dye are the big issue here. You need to be incredibly accurate with timed exposures to achieve the desired cure depth. And even so, you may end up with artifects such as Z-axis stretching, stalagmites... We have been using transparent dyes, of which the orange, red and black are the most efficient depth control colorants, but that is not water clear as in the examples that Matthew has linked to. This is a limitation of using mostly visible light as an activating source: you need visible colorants or pigments to absorb that same light.

Theoretically, the easiest way to achieve high resolution, water clear prints is to use a UV activated resin with some well known UV filters to control cure depth. But then the DLP printers would have to be modified to work with UV sources and that is a different problem all by itself.

Cheers,
Fernando

On 11/25/2012 04:45 AM, bobgarrish wrote:
 

The Objet printers have an advantage in this because they only spray out resin which is to be cured (ie: part of the part) into the area their lights can hit. In the case of DLP or SLA, there's a whole lot of 'bystander' resin in the line of fire.

Not sure about the other company's tech, but what I can say is that we'd need a transparent UV blocker to make it work with projectors. I'm pretty sure such things exist, since you can get UV-blocking acrylic which is still clear, but I don't know what they're called nor how to acquire them.

--- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "matthewof1989" <mharri6@...> wrote:
>
> here are two examples of what I would like to achieve.
>
> http://objet.com/3d-printing-materials/transparent
>
> http://www.dsm.com/en_US/somos/public/home/pages/offerings-somos-water-clear.jsp
>
>
> --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "matthewof1989" <mharri6@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Group!
> >
> > My name is Matthew and this is my first post.
> >
> > I want to use a dlp 3dp with water clear resin but I hear that it is difficult to control the way that the light is projected into the the resin bath. Does anyone know any detail about this?
> >
> > Also, since dying the resin is recommend, I was wonder if there is a dye that changes to clear once it has been exposed to uv light for an extended amount of time.
> >
> > Any information is helpful
> >
> > Thank You!
> >
>



#7735 From: Kenneth Lerman <lerman-yahoo@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 3:10 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
kennethlerman
Send Email Send Email
 
Hi Kevin,

I was interested in what types of patents you had, so I went to http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html to find them. Searching for impson in the Inventor Name field returned ten inventions -- all by Jeremy Impson.

Are your patents US patents, or are they from some other venue? Or is your name not Kevin Impson?

Could you send us a link to some of your inventions, please? This *amateur* is interested.

Regards,

Ken

On 11/24/2012 9:41 PM, Kevin Impson wrote:
 
Hi,

If that was the case ever software company in the world that use's Microsoft's .NET platform for making their software could sue every other company that use's the .NET platform because you would be infringing on each others internal code in the software.

I have lived and make money with my patent attorney, if you don't want to listen don't. Go play attorney and get your butt handed to you.

I built machine's that according to you Bertho infringe on Zcorp and just about every other machine out there... I haven't seen one lawsuit, I have two patents with a third coming. So, I think the money talks and the rest walks.

I've tried to get this point across and hopefully people think about facts.

I won't post again about this subject, amateurs.

Kevin I.


From: Boman33 <boman33@...>
To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:25 AM
Subject: RE: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...



I echo Mike’s comments below.  Nothing about %.  Read the claims extremely carefully and understand them.  That is what counts.
Bertho
 
From:  Mike Polcyn   Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 11:43

 
I am not an attorney but I do understand a bit about U.S. patent law as an inventor and as one who has had to defend against infringement claims. The bottom line is that  "Claim Language" is binary; you infringe or you don't infringe particular claims. You make direct comparison of the claim language with the alleged infringing elements and demonstrate that it does or does not infringe. The patent you download only tell part of the story however, and there is a file wrapper in the patent office for each patent, and that carries the back and forth with the patent examiner over the meaning of claims, clarifications, etc...  and may in fact may narrow the interpretation of a claim significantly. This can be done by limiting field of use for instance or arguing why your claim does not mean the same thing as some previous patent claim. Percentages are irrelevant, and I would steer clear of any lawyer giving that advice.
 

--- On Sat, 11/24/12, Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...> wrote:

From: Kevin Impson <internetgiest@...>
Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
To: "diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com" <diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 6:02 AM
 
Hi Everyone,
 
I have been reading and I will post this again.
 
I have a number of patents and patents pending...
 
The number one thing with patents is this, if your design or machine or whatever is 31% different from what you think you may be infringing on your safe.
 
That is from a patent attorney that operates in the federal corridors of the court system.
 
It can be any one thing or a combination of many things together, just over come the 31% threshold; and your safe.
 
Kevin I.
 
.






#7736 From: "psilhanek" <psilhanek@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:10 pm
Subject: NEED additional material for Z406 3D ZCORP Prototype Printer
psilhanek
Send Email Send Email
 
Do someone can offer for me original or additional material for Z406 3 Prototype
printer..
any help and offer is highly appreciated..
Petr

#7737 From: Jon Elson <elson@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 7:27 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
jmelson2
Send Email Send Email
 
Paolo Velcich wrote:
>
>
> Yes, 30% of an innovation (invention) patent has no meaning. That
> "31%" rule might [eventually] apply to a design/ornamental patent.
>
>
>
> I'm not sure that it will necessarily take one year to clear the suit,
> this last one seems to be quite weak, or more an intimidating action
> than a strong one.
>
Yes, if formlabs/kickstarter can get the judge to throw out the whole
suit due to
3DS' claims being frivolous, it might end quickly.  But, I think most
judges are
hesitant to take such a decision lightly.  there certainly are some
suits that are
just plain frivolous on their face, and do get tossed like that.  But,
somebody
non familiar with the topic at hand needs to get educated on the
terminology,
what is being claimed and whether the defendant is making anything that
actually infringes.  I don't see a judge throwing this suit out quickly, but
I guess it depends a lot on the briefs their lawyers submit.  If 3DS has
mediocre lawyers, the judge might find a lot of waffling in their briefs
and be steered right to where they are trying to bamboozle her.  We can
hope!
>
> However, it appears that 3DS try to keep the market frozen by
> saturating it with patents.
>
Time-honored ploy, dates back to Edison and before.  Edison vs. Westinghouse
sure did a bunch of this, and it was a real WAR!

Jon

#7738 From: Kenneth Lerman <lerman-yahoo@...>
Date: Sun Nov 25, 2012 8:21 pm
Subject: Re: Re: patents? You haven't seen anything yet...
kennethlerman
Send Email Send Email
 
On 11/25/2012 2:27 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
 

Paolo Velcich wrote:
>
>
> Yes, 30% of an innovation (invention) patent has no meaning. That
> "31%" rule might [eventually] apply to a design/ornamental patent.
>
>
>
> I'm not sure that it will necessarily take one year to clear the suit,
> this last one seems to be quite weak, or more an intimidating action
> than a strong one.
>
Yes, if formlabs/kickstarter can get the judge to throw out the whole
suit due to
3DS' claims being frivolous, it might end quickly. But, I think most
judges are
hesitant to take such a decision lightly. there certainly are some
suits that are
just plain frivolous on their face, and do get tossed like that. But,
somebody
non familiar with the topic at hand needs to get educated on the
terminology,
what is being claimed and whether the defendant is making anything that
actually infringes. I don't see a judge throwing this suit out quickly, but
I guess it depends a lot on the briefs their lawyers submit. If 3DS has
mediocre lawyers, the judge might find a lot of waffling in their briefs
and be steered right to where they are trying to bamboozle her. We can
hope!
>
> However, it appears that 3DS try to keep the market frozen by
> saturating it with patents.
>
Time-honored ploy, dates back to Edison and before. Edison vs. Westinghouse
sure did a bunch of this, and it was a real WAR!

Jon

One thing I noticed in the complaint was a section saying that there was no non-infringing use of the allegedly infringing device. Since the patent under discussion seems to relate to exposure for supports, it is clear that making objects that don't require support would be a non-infringing use.

Ken



Messages 7709 - 7738 of 8762   Oldest  |  < Older  |  Newer >  |  Newest
Add to My Yahoo!      XML What's This?

Copyright 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines NEW - Help