Mendis, Secchi and Reeves (2015)
Contents
Source Details
Mendis, Secchi and Reeves (2015) | |
Title: | A Legal and Empirical Study into the Intellectual Property Implications of 3D Printing |
Author(s): | Mendis, D., Secchi, D., Reeves, P. |
Year: | 2015 |
Citation: | Mendis, D., et al. (2015). A Legal and Empirical Study into the Intellectual Property Implications of 3D Printing. |
Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | This two-part Study adopts a quantitative and qualitative approach respectively.
For the qualitative study, data was collected from 17 websites. The analysis established that the total number of files shared on the platforms was 385,118 and the total number of users 48,715. Data was retrieved on January 2014 and covers six years, from January 2008 to January 2014. Study II is qualitative and presents six case studies in various industrial sectors. The researchers interviewed key stakeholders. |
Data Type: | Primary data |
Secondary Data Sources: | |
Data Collection Methods: | |
Data Analysis Methods: | |
Industry(ies): | |
Country(ies): | |
Cross Country Study?: | Yes |
Comparative Study?: | No |
Literature review?: | No |
Government or policy study?: | Yes |
Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
Funder(s): |
|
Abstract
The Executive Summary reports the purpose, scope, methodology and key findings from two complementary studies on the intellectual property implications of 3D printing. The two Studies provide for an overarching empirical and legal analysis into the current position of 3D printing. Particularly it offers new data and findings on the exploration of online platforms dedicated to 3D printing as well as its impact in selected industries. The Executive Summary details the findings of the research, conclusions and recommendations for the UK Government; Online Platforms and Industry.
Main Results of the Study
The present research and the accompanying data concludes that taking into account accessibility to materials, sophisticated printing machines, costs and economics for the average user, the impact of this technology will not be felt among the general public for a few years to come. Although it is too early to tell when this will happen, the researchers conclude that a technological breakthrough is needed to make 3D printing an everyday reality.In the meantime the authors have made recommendations for a working group to monitor and advise the industry on developments.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
It is recommended that the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) establish a Working Group to cover the various IP rights which may need to be tackled in the future. The Working Group should also provide clarity on the status of CAD files and how they can best be used in industry. The Group should also consider how best to tackle the traceability of 3D printed spare parts.It is recommended that online platforms provide more awareness and understanding of the different types of licences. This can be achieved by explaining the nuances relating to each licence in clear and simple language, rather than simply ‘encouraging’ the user to adopt a particular type of licence. Furthermore, online platforms can assign the most appropriate licence as a default with ‘opt-out’ as an option.One recommendation for industry would be to adopt secure streaming of 3D CAD files via an Application Programming Interface (API) thereby embracing a ‘pay-per-print’ business model. Manufacturers could also consider licensing CAD files more widely, thereby opening up doors to a range of outlets selling 3D CAD files. This will avoid locking the manufacturer into an agreement through a system such as a ‘one-stop-shop’ for (spare) parts. It is recommended that the automotive industry give consideration to the traceability of 3D printed spare parts, particularly in relation to the safety and usability of the spare part.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 6 |
Level of aggregation: | Case Studies |
Period of material under study: | 2008 to 2014 |
Sample size: | 17 |
Level of aggregation: | Websites |
Period of material under study: | 2008 to 2014 |
Sample size: | 385 118 |
Level of aggregation: | Files |
Period of material under study: | 2008 to 2014 |