You're missing an important bit of context here. Some if not all of these technologies were in regular use in the industry and 3d printing community before Stratasys filed the patent. A patent should never have been granted and is therefore illegal.
You need to read the specific claims, not the headlines. The claims are at the end of the patent and they describe the specific implementation. For example, the patent isn't on "heated bed" it's on a specific implementation that involves a flexible surface covered by PEI (not attached via tape). So if there were flexible, PEI build plates (not Kapton tape) in 2013 then there is prior art.
I think that they are seeing that these small cheap desktop printers are starting to become capable of the same quality and efficiency as their high end machines, so they feel it is high time to crush the competition -- because if companies began to realize they could ditch their overpriced Stratasys for a $500 Bambu Lab they will lose a lot of money! A company like Stratasys depends on convincing manufactures that their machine is 1000x better than a $500 printer and that's beginning to not be true. It is truly a case of big business lobbying for themselves through lawsuits.
The industrial style machines usually have the worst quality from what I have seen.. Bambu has changed 3D printing for the better and Stratasys can't compete with the reliability and price. The only thing I have seen that these industrial machines have going for them is printing higher temps, reliability, and faster support because these aren't meant for regular consumers. These patents should have never been approved and I don't understand how they were when even in 2016, other manufactures were using the same methods.
This lawsuit is just so dumb to me. I mean I understand having to protect your patents but these patents are so vague that they should have never been approved! Even when the patent's were approved, there were multiple 3D printer manufactures who used some of these features. I just think they should have to file lawsuits against every printer manufacture and not single out Bambu and if they don't, the lawsuit should be thrown out and their patent voided. They are just upset that Bambu has made 3D printing easy and relatively affordable compared to their overpriced machines. Its all about greed to me.
Stratasys is going to have a hard time defending why they have slept so long on alot of this stuff. It feels more like an intimidation tactic than anything. Theres also the fact that alot of this stuff has been created/worked out different ways than the original patent. Which is part of the way to get around patents when reverse engineering and creating clones/competing products. Which is something taken into account when deciding patent cases. For the most part this feels like FUD. It wouldn't surprise me if its tied up in the courts for the next 10 years, at which point the patents which some are close to expiring already, will be expired.
I really hope this is the case. Love or hate Bambu, they have changed the industry and going after them for this is really dumb in my opinion. It just sucks because I think whatever happens, we the customers will be the one paying for it to make up for the costs of everything. But I can see Bambu leading them on for 10 years with how much they are worth.
@@jmp7624 the other thing is they are a Chinese company. Often judgements against Chinese companies related to patents goes nowhere. Either they rename and relabel their core company. Or the government will step in and shield them a high percentage of times. Some of these other companies where a lot smaller too when Stratasys bullied them in court. So they took the easy way out, settled in some way. Rather than risk a long expensive legal battle. Bambu is already much larger than most of the FDM companies Stratasys has publicly gone after.
Why don't Stratasys compete and come out with something better since they are the pioneer of 3d printing. Instead of spending money on useless lawyers, put that money into R&D. Competition is always good.
Exactly. They could have a line of desktop printers but they don't. They want these small desktop printers crushed so they can reap profit from their industrial ones.
They just want to be hated by all 3D printing Community. Just look up on those dates of that patents. - Additive manufacturing method for printing three-dimensional parts with purge towers | Placed on 2013 LOL - Heated build platform and system for three dimensional printing methods | Placed on 2014 - Method for building three-dimensional objects with extrusion-based layered deposition systems | Placed on 2006 - Three-dimensional printer with force detection | Again 2013 - Three-dimensional printer with force detection (second) | and 2015 Who the hell give them those patents? I dont know how accurate is chatGPT, but it says that heated buildplate was introduced in early 2000's and first 3D printer was build in 1983 by Charles Hull. So who and why give them those patents, i dont get it. Also using force detection by BLTouch i bet was introduced in
Also in the las few years they placed patents on resin stuff and water soluble materials, lol. They just patent everything xD and they think they invented all of this.
The patent system was originally intended to protect individuals from large companies. The idea was an individual would patent an idea and could then go after a large company who stole their idea. Of course it has not been used this way for a long time. In my view most patents should not be granted. However the patent office cannot possibly review every patent properly so a lot of patents are approved when they should not be. The idea of a flexible build plate was probably novel enough to have permitted a patent. The idea of tape vs some coating should not matter. They probably had to make this distinction to get around the expiration of the earlier patent or the prior art of using tape. As for RFID tags in the spools, give me a break! Radio Frequency IDentification is in the name. The patent holder of the RFID device is probably getting a royalty for the sale of each device. The patent on using these devices in a spool should have been immediately denied because this is an obvious use of an already patented device. What other ways could this have been done? A bar code or QR code reader. Go really old school and use magnetic ink like used to be used on checks. Or even worse, just tell the software what you are using. Oh wait, we are already doing that for non Bambu filament. Patents these days are often used as bargaining chips. One megacorp contacts another and comes to a deal. Stratasys probably contacted Bambu and tried to get them to give them some money for one of these really weak patents. It isn't at all clear what will happen when going to court. In the worst situation I see Bambu losing in court and simply stop selling here under that name. Form a new company and rebrand all the products. Heck, this is China. You don't actually buy a product made by a company called Bambu. You buy a product labeled Bambu made in factories in China. Bambu can be thought of as a marketing firm for this purpose. Does the court where the suit is filed even have any jurisdiction over anything sold under the Bambu name?
I believe the idea of losing IP if you don't defend it is mostly a trademark thing? I am not a lawyer though. But if that applies to patents than frankly they should have most of the listed patents invalidated, as things like heated beds are industry wide at this point. But they have an absurd number of them, I imagine that they can hold Bambu Labs in court for a long time if they want to.
You might be right about the defense thing, I'm also not a lawyer. I would think that you'd have a weaker case if you go after company A for infringement but haven't gone after company B who has been violating a patent longer.
I haven't looked to see who has deeper pockets... although I did see a report that shows Stratasys' stock value has been in decline for quite some time.
@@directedt3ch apparently Bambulabs turned over 300 million last year. Looking to maybe add another 200 million next year. They ain’t no little start up anymore.
This is stupid. I’m 200$ from buying my bambu lab and now what is going to happen? Will it shut down the software and brick the printer? Or should I buy a few in order to sell them later?
@NoahJohnson7452 Honestly I think it will take years to settle. More than likely if Stratasys wind, bambu will just have to pay royalties for the patents. Buy and enjoy!
The parallel to this is Kodak. Kodak owns virtually all the digital photography patents. They waited until so many digital camera manufacturers were generating revenue, before they sued for infringement. Kodak reaped $400M per year from royalties. Stratasys likely needs/wants the revenue stream, so I’d guess they try to get royalties from all the violators.
Don't be under any impression that bambulab is a small start up company, I love my P1P but I purchased stocks in stratasys today because it can only go up at this point. I'm hoping for a settlement or an acquisition
As far as purge towers, BBL really doesn't use them. They use a Prime Tower that is not used in anyway as a purge. Thats what the Poop Chute is for LoL.
Most of the 3D printing patents are dumb, because most of the technology already exist in other types of products. For example, a patent on better temperature control when 3D printing by using a in closed space. yeah no shit, captain obvious company, are you going to go after every oven producer to? It is basically the exact same thing, a in closed space with an electric heater.
Stratasys deserves to win this case. They are a US company and Bambu Lab is a cheating, stealing Chinese company. I say Stratasys for the WIN! Hobbyists should not have 3D printers. Leave the 3D printing to the pros! Hobbyists are hurting US based 3D printer US because they keep supporting Chinese companies instead of US companies! Finally they have said enough is enough. Better buy up all those Bambu Lab printers while you can. I'm talking to you, 3D print farmers!
You're missing an important bit of context here. Some if not all of these technologies were in regular use in the industry and 3d printing community before Stratasys filed the patent. A patent should never have been granted and is therefore illegal.
Yes, exactly! I don't understand how any of these vague patents were approved.
That's a great point! I'm not sure how some of these patents were granted.
The US patent office being incompetent garbage? You don't say.
sadly they changed the patent law years back to "first to patent" who invented and prior use no longer matters
You need to read the specific claims, not the headlines. The claims are at the end of the patent and they describe the specific implementation. For example, the patent isn't on "heated bed" it's on a specific implementation that involves a flexible surface covered by PEI (not attached via tape). So if there were flexible, PEI build plates (not Kapton tape) in 2013 then there is prior art.
I think that they are seeing that these small cheap desktop printers are starting to become capable of the same quality and efficiency as their high end machines, so they feel it is high time to crush the competition -- because if companies began to realize they could ditch their overpriced Stratasys for a $500 Bambu Lab they will lose a lot of money! A company like Stratasys depends on convincing manufactures that their machine is 1000x better than a $500 printer and that's beginning to not be true. It is truly a case of big business lobbying for themselves through lawsuits.
The industrial style machines usually have the worst quality from what I have seen.. Bambu has changed 3D printing for the better and Stratasys can't compete with the reliability and price. The only thing I have seen that these industrial machines have going for them is printing higher temps, reliability, and faster support because these aren't meant for regular consumers. These patents should have never been approved and I don't understand how they were when even in 2016, other manufactures were using the same methods.
Seriously!!
This lawsuit is just so dumb to me. I mean I understand having to protect your patents but these patents are so vague that they should have never been approved! Even when the patent's were approved, there were multiple 3D printer manufactures who used some of these features. I just think they should have to file lawsuits against every printer manufacture and not single out Bambu and if they don't, the lawsuit should be thrown out and their patent voided. They are just upset that Bambu has made 3D printing easy and relatively affordable compared to their overpriced machines. Its all about greed to me.
I can't believe some of the things that they've been allowed to patent! Supports??? Really???
@@directedt3ch Can I patent "objects that are made of matter from this universe"
@@johnsmith-i5j7i Haha I think Stratasys already has that one pending as well
Stratasys is going to have a hard time defending why they have slept so long on alot of this stuff. It feels more like an intimidation tactic than anything. Theres also the fact that alot of this stuff has been created/worked out different ways than the original patent. Which is part of the way to get around patents when reverse engineering and creating clones/competing products. Which is something taken into account when deciding patent cases. For the most part this feels like FUD. It wouldn't surprise me if its tied up in the courts for the next 10 years, at which point the patents which some are close to expiring already, will be expired.
I really hope this is the case. Love or hate Bambu, they have changed the industry and going after them for this is really dumb in my opinion. It just sucks because I think whatever happens, we the customers will be the one paying for it to make up for the costs of everything. But I can see Bambu leading them on for 10 years with how much they are worth.
Great point!
@@jmp7624 the other thing is they are a Chinese company. Often judgements against Chinese companies related to patents goes nowhere. Either they rename and relabel their core company. Or the government will step in and shield them a high percentage of times. Some of these other companies where a lot smaller too when Stratasys bullied them in court. So they took the easy way out, settled in some way. Rather than risk a long expensive legal battle. Bambu is already much larger than most of the FDM companies Stratasys has publicly gone after.
Time to Boycott Stratasys.
Boycott Stratasys!
Why don't Stratasys compete and come out with something better since they are the pioneer of 3d printing. Instead of spending money on useless lawyers, put that money into R&D. Competition is always good.
Because they can't lol. They didn't even come up with the ideas on most of these patents, just patented them before someone else did.
I agree!
Exactly. They could have a line of desktop printers but they don't. They want these small desktop printers crushed so they can reap profit from their industrial ones.
They just want to be hated by all 3D printing Community. Just look up on those dates of that patents.
- Additive manufacturing method for printing three-dimensional parts with purge towers | Placed on 2013 LOL
- Heated build platform and system for three dimensional printing methods | Placed on 2014
- Method for building three-dimensional objects with extrusion-based layered deposition systems | Placed on 2006
- Three-dimensional printer with force detection | Again 2013
- Three-dimensional printer with force detection (second) | and 2015
Who the hell give them those patents? I dont know how accurate is chatGPT, but it says that heated buildplate was introduced in early 2000's and first 3D printer was build in 1983 by Charles Hull. So who and why give them those patents, i dont get it. Also using force detection by BLTouch i bet was introduced in
Also in the las few years they placed patents on resin stuff and water soluble materials, lol. They just patent everything xD and they think they invented all of this.
Isn't it crazy?!? Sounds like the patent office isn't doing any research.
The purge tower is configurable on the printers via software it's not built into the printer itself. So turning it off means no patent infringement.
Interesting thought!
The patent system was originally intended to protect individuals from large companies. The idea was an individual would patent an idea and could then go after a large company who stole their idea. Of course it has not been used this way for a long time. In my view most patents should not be granted. However the patent office cannot possibly review every patent properly so a lot of patents are approved when they should not be. The idea of a flexible build plate was probably novel enough to have permitted a patent. The idea of tape vs some coating should not matter. They probably had to make this distinction to get around the expiration of the earlier patent or the prior art of using tape.
As for RFID tags in the spools, give me a break! Radio Frequency IDentification is in the name. The patent holder of the RFID device is probably getting a royalty for the sale of each device. The patent on using these devices in a spool should have been immediately denied because this is an obvious use of an already patented device. What other ways could this have been done? A bar code or QR code reader. Go really old school and use magnetic ink like used to be used on checks. Or even worse, just tell the software what you are using. Oh wait, we are already doing that for non Bambu filament.
Patents these days are often used as bargaining chips. One megacorp contacts another and comes to a deal. Stratasys probably contacted Bambu and tried to get them to give them some money for one of these really weak patents. It isn't at all clear what will happen when going to court. In the worst situation I see Bambu losing in court and simply stop selling here under that name. Form a new company and rebrand all the products. Heck, this is China. You don't actually buy a product made by a company called Bambu. You buy a product labeled Bambu made in factories in China. Bambu can be thought of as a marketing firm for this purpose. Does the court where the suit is filed even have any jurisdiction over anything sold under the Bambu name?
Brilliant insights! You nailed it.
This needs thrown out in court that company attack and sue for money grab
Bad move from Stratasys... i think
@isod89 It certainly doesn't make me happy.
Stratasys is full of it!
I believe the idea of losing IP if you don't defend it is mostly a trademark thing? I am not a lawyer though. But if that applies to patents than frankly they should have most of the listed patents invalidated, as things like heated beds are industry wide at this point. But they have an absurd number of them, I imagine that they can hold Bambu Labs in court for a long time if they want to.
You might be right about the defense thing, I'm also not a lawyer. I would think that you'd have a weaker case if you go after company A for infringement but haven't gone after company B who has been violating a patent longer.
what the heck is going on in this world ? why just why?
i hope they dont patent of our home at least
No kidding! Yikes!!
I think at this point Bambulabs could most likely ride out the storm and sink Stratasys in legal fees anyway.
I haven't looked to see who has deeper pockets... although I did see a report that shows Stratasys' stock value has been in decline for quite some time.
@@directedt3ch apparently Bambulabs turned over 300 million last year. Looking to maybe add another 200 million next year. They ain’t no little start up anymore.
@@BarnesysBuilds Those are some impressive earnings!
This is stupid. I’m 200$ from buying my bambu lab and now what is going to happen? Will it shut down the software and brick the printer? Or should I buy a few in order to sell them later?
@NoahJohnson7452 Honestly I think it will take years to settle. More than likely if Stratasys wind, bambu will just have to pay royalties for the patents. Buy and enjoy!
The parallel to this is Kodak. Kodak owns virtually all the digital photography patents. They waited until so many digital camera manufacturers were generating revenue, before they sued for infringement. Kodak reaped $400M per year from royalties. Stratasys likely needs/wants the revenue stream, so I’d guess they try to get royalties from all the violators.
And we'll end up paying to cover those costs :(
Don't be under any impression that bambulab is a small start up company, I love my P1P but I purchased stocks in stratasys today because it can only go up at this point. I'm hoping for a settlement or an acquisition
As far as purge towers, BBL really doesn't use them. They use a Prime Tower that is not used in anyway as a purge. Thats what the Poop Chute is for LoL.
@@richardsurack8715 Great insight!
I think, that biggest problem is in Bambu lab way of patenting things are already in use.
I'm gonna patent air breathing mechanism and sue you all
You're gonna be rich!
This is classic patent-trolling
Prusa has been using purge towers for years.
Great point!
Most of the 3D printing patents are dumb, because most of the technology already exist in other types of products. For example, a patent on better temperature control when 3D printing by using a in closed space. yeah no shit, captain obvious company, are you going to go after every oven producer to? It is basically the exact same thing, a in closed space with an electric heater.
It blows my mind some of the patents out there!
Bambulab is a patent troll. Stratasys is a patent troll.
Boycott stratasys
Stratasys deserves to win this case. They are a US company and Bambu Lab is a cheating, stealing Chinese company. I say Stratasys for the WIN! Hobbyists should not have 3D printers. Leave the 3D printing to the pros! Hobbyists are hurting US based 3D printer US because they keep supporting Chinese companies instead of US companies! Finally they have said enough is enough. Better buy up all those Bambu Lab printers while you can. I'm talking to you, 3D print farmers!
That's an interesting take. So only large corporations deserve technology? It should never make the way down to a person with a hobby?