3 ms·

Unfortunately, the Makerbot is no longer open source, which rather ruins their point in mentioning it (the UCK was first published before MB went closed and evi

by Kliment 14y ago

Unfortunately, the Makerbot is no longer open source, which rather ruins their point in mentioning it (the UCK was first published before MB went closed and evil, MB technology is entirely derived from originally open hardware and software).

jacquesm 14y ago
What's evil about it? You can simply build the older generation makerbot. It's no different than what Apple did with FreeBSD and NetBSD by way of Next, apart from the fact that Apple did not actually make FreeBSD or NetBSD. Anybody, including Makerbot could make a commercial successor to Makerbot.
- Kliment 14y ago
  What's evil is taking open hardware and closing it. There is nothing in their machine that is not a direct derivative of GPL-licensed reprap technology, and they give neither attribution nor source back. In addition, they are patenting technology developed openly. It's a pretty disgusting thing to do.
  - jacquesm 14y ago
    I agree it's disgusting. So, the best way to deal with it is very simple: utterly ignore them. Those patents aren't worth the paper they are printed on, prior art abounds. The hobbyist community won't care about those patents at all, but any other commercial entity they plan to sue will wipe them out with their portfolio, CNC stuff is a patent minefield. Okuma, Heidenhain, Bosch, Deckel and tons of other very large, very wealthy and established companies will not be impressed at all and have enough patents of their own that they could probably stop them from going to market at all if they desired to do so. Additive or subtractive, it's a detail and lots of these companies are active in both fields. I really don't see the problem. Simply ignore them, beat them on price and features and they'll go to their deserved end, which is to cease to exist. And if you want to speed it up then you should sue them for taking what's yours (if you were a contributor to some bit that made it into their commercial offering), a lawsuit testing the GPL in that fashion is overdue anyway. Probably they'll fold before it goes to trial, as they always do.
    - Kliment 14y ago
      Ignoring them is my strategy as well, but it doesn't help that others are mentioning them so prominently as an open option. I felt it was necessary to say something to point out this is no longer the case.

by Kliment 14y ago

jacquesm 14y ago

What's evil about it? You can simply build the older generation makerbot. It's no different than what Apple did with FreeBSD and NetBSD by way of Next, apart from the fact that Apple did not actually make FreeBSD or NetBSD. Anybody, including Makerbot could make a commercial successor to Makerbot.

Kliment 14y ago
What's evil is taking open hardware and closing it. There is nothing in their machine that is not a direct derivative of GPL-licensed reprap technology, and they give neither attribution nor source back. In addition, they are patenting technology developed openly. It's a pretty disgusting thing to do.
- jacquesm 14y ago
  I agree it's disgusting. So, the best way to deal with it is very simple: utterly ignore them. Those patents aren't worth the paper they are printed on, prior art abounds. The hobbyist community won't care about those patents at all, but any other commercial entity they plan to sue will wipe them out with their portfolio, CNC stuff is a patent minefield. Okuma, Heidenhain, Bosch, Deckel and tons of other very large, very wealthy and established companies will not be impressed at all and have enough patents of their own that they could probably stop them from going to market at all if they desired to do so. Additive or subtractive, it's a detail and lots of these companies are active in both fields. I really don't see the problem. Simply ignore them, beat them on price and features and they'll go to their deserved end, which is to cease to exist. And if you want to speed it up then you should sue them for taking what's yours (if you were a contributor to some bit that made it into their commercial offering), a lawsuit testing the GPL in that fashion is overdue anyway. Probably they'll fold before it goes to trial, as they always do.
  - Kliment 14y ago
    Ignoring them is my strategy as well, but it doesn't help that others are mentioning them so prominently as an open option. I felt it was necessary to say something to point out this is no longer the case.