Never nice when things get ‘icky’ but that’s what is happening Stateside in the 3D printing industry. Today, Stratasys Inc., the North American-based subsidiary of Stratasys Ltd. has released a press release stating that it has brought a lawsuit for patent infringement against Afinia, a division of Microboards Technology LLC, in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Afinia has a license to produce the hardware in the US from Chinese company Delta Micro Factory Corporation, which is the OEM for the popular UP! 3D printer range via PP3DP and a host of global distributors.
According to Stratasys, who released the press release within an hour of filing the lawsuit, the action “is seeking injunctive relief and damages for infringement of four of its 3D printing patents” alleging “that Afinia’s sale, promotion and use of its Series H printer infringes patents directed to part porosity, liquefier structure, temperature control and tool paths for constructing part perimeters.”
Among the many questions that spring to mind, the predominant one is why ….. Why Afinia? Why now?
David Reis, Stratasys Ltd’s CEO goes some way to explain, when he says: “IP infringement discourages companies from investing in innovation. Stratasys pioneered 3D printing, and invests millions of dollars each year to develop our technologies. In 2012 alone, Stratasys Ltd invested $33.3 million or 9.3 percent of its revenues in R&D. We intend to protect that investment.”
It’s hard to argue against that in commercial terms, and if the infringements are proved, then one can only speculate that Stratasys — who also states that “this is the first time that Stratasys has commenced an action for infringement of its patents” in 20+ years, in direct contrast to their closest competition — is throwing down a gauntlet to the many, MANY other 3D printer companies that have developed and commercialised products using FFF technology in the last five years. This action has huge implications.
Depending on the outcome of this suit, this could potentially be the start of some sort of cull across the 3D printing landscape?
Ever an optimist, I seriously hope not, but I just have a niggling suspicion! The goal posts have moved dramatically in the last five years, and got a whole lot more serious. I imagine this will be a major talking point at Euromold next week — it’s certainly at the top of my list of questions!
Its all about Makerbot. Now Stratasys have Makerbot they need to squeeze the competitors…and Afina/UP! are certainly that.
Does this mean they can sue every FFF printer manufacturer?
Let’s hope not. Seems like they waited for the reprap winner to emerge(Makerbot). Buy them out. Now take out the competition. . What a shame. This was a very exciting time. I hope it is not the end. I guess everyone will go back to selling kits.
I’m not sure I agree with you on what a ‘RepRap’ is, if you count Makerbot machines in their current iterations. Not dissing the machines but they’re clearly not repraps.
Anyone who sells a FDM machine that cones under the remit of the patents (all of them). Yes. Honestly, and this will be a very unpopular statement, every FDM machine on the market probably infringes a Stratasys patent, but Stratasys have not chosen to pursue them because the value of the market was so tiny. Not any more. The whole maker FDM industry has been kidding themselves on that they can continue to ignore IP.
Stratasys played the long game here by letting the Open Source community develop the market on a small scale before the likes of Makerbot developed it into a niche consumer brand. Now we know why they bought Makerbot.
So now as the sales volumes of FDM machines (and lets cut the BS here, they are all FDM, anyone can invent a three word phrase), are getting to levels that might be interesting in terms of revenue, Stratasys are reeling in the patents. It will be Afinia first, and they will settle, then it will be 3D Systems and anyone else who Stratasys percieve to have a market worth fighting for.
They will likely continue to ignore the RepRap guys and kit builder…simply not enough money in it.
Well, that’s going to ruffle a few feathers…
Interesting that they have gone after the ‘software’ side of their patents and not the direct hardware implementation of the machine.
In theory, that could all be changed to not infringe the patent and the product could continue to be sold. 3DS did a similar thing when it protected it’s patents against the Form1, that was all about the implementation of software/process rather than the machine itself.
Stratasys have waited a long time before doing this, are they testing the water to see what damages they can recoup from sales to-date?
Their are commercial machines that infringe mechanically and operationally with Stratasys patents, those aspects are much harder to change than software, so why not go after those?
The FFF/FDM point was originally about trademarks, RepRap/Makerbot adopted FFF so as not to imply the use of a Stratasys registered trademark. Some people simply don’t seem to understand this and continue to promote ‘FDM’ based machines on their websites without owning a license from Stratasys to do so. I’ll let you guess one such company I’m thinking of right now that does just that on their website specification page…
If Stratasys are going after methods of printing, (because these routines can dramatically improve printing results) we may see more of the custom commercial developments come under fire.
I do hope they stay away from the open-source community, many things and developments are going on all the time that enrich peoples lives (more than money) in this industry, it would be a real shame to loose any of that.
I imagine this is more about ensuring Makerbot consumer sales continue to grow and others get nipped in the bud. If you are a large retailer, your most important factor is continuity of supply. If your supplier is facing a patent challenge and you have another larger supplier who owns the patent, which machine are you going to stock? I suspect this play has been part of the long term Stratasys strategy since the days when RepRap first started – let everybody run free, then buy up the biggest player and clamp down on the rest.
That way, when the primary patents do expire, and the commercial products are forced to reduce in price/margin you have a substantial consumer business in place to exploit the next round of IP you own…Objet.
I very much doubt Stratasys or 3D Systems will bother with the Open Source / Maker community, it is simply not large enough to worry about. Perhaps as a whole the market is reasonable, but as individual businesses in it, they are tiny.
As for Stratasys, what they are doing makes perfect business sense. Watch their share price start to climb.
You almost right, except on detail. The key FDM patents has expired few years ago, and because of this so many small manufacturers start to produce and sell them, and their pricese drops from tens of thousands to hundreds of dollars. Stratasys making a complaints to secondary issues patents directed to part porosity, liquefier structure, temperature control, and tool paths for constructing part perimeters. Actually this is not a big issue for good engeneers to find another technical solutions in this parts, but it can make some troubles of course.
It is obvious that Stratasys wants to enter the market of cheap personal FDM printers, because quality of their printing already closely came nearer to quality of the printing of professional printers which price is tens and hundreds thousands dollars and which are made by Stratasys. So they trying to eliminate all competitors in this field. Nothing special, actually. But patents in this case again act not in the best quality, because as Makerbot not that company which seeks to reduce the prices of printers so that they became really widely available (and increased market size, by the way).
Here the interesting article about next wave of 3D-printing technologies, which soon will come to personal users – http://qz.com/106483/3d-printing-will-explode-in-2014-thanks-to-the-expiration-of-key-patents/
These lawsuits seldom go forward without a “Shot off the bows.”
It’s time for the big money to come in and flex its muscle and do whatever is necessary to gain market share. The lobbyists have invaded Washington and will use big money to by politicians and buy the regulatory advantage. If they can’t sue you out of business they will legislate you out of business.
The American Way: If you can’t beat your competition by actually building a better product, then sue your competition out of existence based on the nonsense of “owning” an abstract idea. Add Stratasys and Makerbot to the list of brands I’ll never buy.
This is very bad news for 3d printing. When big companies begin playing this game, they hinder development. So all the expectations of 3d printing will not be met due to some big guys greed.
Shouldn’t the RepRap community bring a class action lawsuit against Makerbot (stratasys) for stealing their contributions?
Why don’t sue 3Dsystems? The cube is a bad copy of the Up Plus… oh wait, 3dsystems is a big company, no guts to sue them
Stratasys, VERY bad
bit off-topic, the weekly cup of this week: https://www.facebook.com/europerminutedesign/posts/771996616150032
Inspired by the Stratasys lawsuit on Afinia. This cup has all the patents applied, whatever printer you use.
cheersjoris
IANAL, but this is clearly a lawsuit meant to harass and do financial harm to Afinia, and not based on any actual meritorious patent claims. Let’s hope they get a good donation of legal help from someone like the EFF.
Meanwhile, RepRap will continue to grow and thrive, regardless of how this goes. The genie is out of the bottle, and there’s no way it’ll get corked again with such a wide variety of DIY printers out in the wild.