3 ms·

It's odd that a CAD file is made to seem equivalent to the actual physical object. A CAD file should, under the current system, be copyrightable, which it is.

It's odd that a CAD file is made to seem equivalent to the actual physical object. A CAD file should, under the current system, be copyrightable, which it is. However, it is nothing more than a description of an object. A patent is also a description of an object, with the only difference that the former is interpreted by computers (or humans with the aid of computers) and the latter is interpreted by lawyers. As mentioned in another comment, patents should contain relevant CAD files to better describe the invention, instead of obfuscated legalese prose that nobody understands. Patents are supposed to create a legal monopoly for the price of disclosing the invention. If the inventor does not wish to disclose details, the invention can remain a trade secret instead, but granting both secrecy and a monopoly does nothing for innovation. Clearly, 3D printing makes it easier to replicate physical objects, but as the patent system's stated objective is to further innovation, maybe it's time to relax patent licensing instead, as 3D printing giving the ability to tinker and create to "the masses", and will undoubtedly produce a lot more innovation than locking down patent law.

JupiterMoon 11y ago
> patents should contain relevant CAD files to better describe the invention Interestingly this could actually provide stronger legal protection for the patenting person. Under existing copyright law people are unwilling to work on open source projects that interact with closed source products for which there has been a source code leak because it is harder to prove that you've never seen the closed source code. Currently one can make new CAD file without infringing copyright (patent law I'm not sure of) but if people published the CAD files with the patent the patent owner could claim that any files that floated around on the internet are copyright infringements (and hence crimes an an of themselves). --- I am not a lawyer. I'm definitely not your lawyer. If you need legal advice pay someone that knows what they're talking about.
- dognotdog 11y ago
  Interesting twist, as data itself is not under copyright, but a compilation may be. Is a CAD file such a compilation, or just data formatting? I'm not sure. (However, I do blame The System for this uncertainty. I wish it'd err more often favouring the copier, instead of the rights holder, if that would make everything simpler.)
  - JupiterMoon 11y ago
    Surely a CAD file is the intellectual property of the person that made it (or the company that hired them to do so)?

JupiterMoon 11y ago

> patents should contain relevant CAD files to better describe the invention Interestingly this could actually provide stronger legal protection for the patenting person. Under existing copyright law people are unwilling to work on open source projects that interact with closed source products for which there has been a source code leak because it is harder to prove that you've never seen the closed source code. Currently one can make new CAD file without infringing copyright (patent law I'm not sure of) but if people published the CAD files with the patent the patent owner could claim that any files that floated around on the internet are copyright infringements (and hence crimes an an of themselves). --- I am not a lawyer. I'm definitely not your lawyer. If you need legal advice pay someone that knows what they're talking about.

dognotdog 11y ago
Interesting twist, as data itself is not under copyright, but a compilation may be. Is a CAD file such a compilation, or just data formatting? I'm not sure. (However, I do blame The System for this uncertainty. I wish it'd err more often favouring the copier, instead of the rights holder, if that would make everything simpler.)
- JupiterMoon 11y ago
  Surely a CAD file is the intellectual property of the person that made it (or the company that hired them to do so)?