RE: Patent in RP

Date: Mon Apr 24 2000 - 21:01:48 EEST

Hello All,

With regard to the Objet equipment and patents: We need to first realize
that this equipment is being developed outside of the US by a non US
company. The fact that they are showing the machine during US based shows
and conferences may be nothing more then a method find out what level of
interest there (in the US) is prior to making the final plunge into the
market. Does anybody know if 3D patents extend into Italy? Having not seen
the equipment and based on the description(s) provided here it sounds like
this equipment is based more on the COLAM technology then Cubital or 3D
Systems. Being that the COLAM technology is from Japan I wonder if they
will worry about patent infringement!

Unfortunately the nature of the RP industry (at least in the US) has always
been on the aggressive side to prevent others from entering the market. Not
desirable but the way it is! I'm sure that Objet and other relative new
comers like Z-Corp have taken this into consideration when getting ready to
market or introduce their products. We all would like to see the RP
manufacturers act a bit more civil about these things but were talking about
business! How many of you would act any different toward your competitors?
The smart company will have all of their basses covered prior to introducing
a new machine and it would be smart of those that would move forward with
law suits to take a long hard look at the business prior to proceeding. Our
industry is vastly under used and not all that well known in the
manufacturing communities, as such, there is an lot of room for existing
manufacturers to grow and space left over for those wishing to develop new

Just my two cents worth....

Karl R. Denton
Lead Engineer
Williams International

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Steven Pollack []
        Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 12:39 PM
        To: B. J. Arnold-Feret
        Subject: Re: Patent in RP

        I could agree with this if the RP company were doing more with the
        technology than just keeping others from using the technology. As I
said in my
        original post, using patents to defend against infringement is alot
        than using patents to keep technology off the market. The former I
        support, the latter offends me.

        Still, I don't want to get too far away from my original point that
the RP
        industry could learn something from the reasons Objet has generated
so much
        interest from this forum. Instead of asking their internal
engineers what
        features would be useful, RP companies might open their ears to what
the market
        is saying.

        Steven Pollack
        President, Digital Jeweler(tm) inc.

        "B. J. Arnold-Feret" wrote:

> While I agree that patents can be used in a negative manner,
doesn't it make
> sense for firms that spend the money and time to develop an idea
and process
> to protect those ideas and processes for a time period so that
they can
> realize monetary gain for their investments? And, if you are
going to have
> the patents, you need to defend them aggressively or they are not
worth the
> fees required to get them.
> As we all know, development is not cheap. While we may all be
coming down
> on 3D and other RP firms for doing the patent protection as a
> tactic, would any of us be so generous to share a revolutionary
> that could earn lots of dollars for investors if we had to spend a
sum to
> perfect it in the first place?
> As Elaine and others noted, the RP world and users don't share
> tips or techniques at RP&M anymore. To expect manufacturing firms
> "share" their technology for the good of the industry may be the
pot calling
> the kettle black. The majority of firms and individuals in
business need to
> make profits.
> B. J. Arnold-Feret
> For more information about the rp-ml, see

        For more information about the rp-ml, see

For more information about the rp-ml, see

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 23:03:20 EEST