14 DAY TRIAL // Copyright lawsuits can be really nasty business, and while a man from Sioux Falls, South Dakota didn't quite reach that stage, he did get rather close to the flame.
Being an art lover, he inevitably laid eyes on the bronze replicas of Michelangelo's statues that were on display in his hometown. One was in a city park and the other on the campus of the Augustana College, a private liberal arts college.
After taking thousands of photographs, he built 3D models of the two statues, Michelangelo's Moses and David.
He even uploaded the Moses model to Thingiverse, at which point he was asked by Augustana College to take it down, who felt they had property over the statue and the copyrights.
The college and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America which they associated with were apparently uncomfortable with the models and concerned they would be used inappropriately. That was the official story at least.
The Augustana College legal department implied that the statues were copyrighted
Which, of course, is untrue because everything becomes public domain after some time, and Michelangelo lived a long, long time ago.
Jerry Fisher, the photogrammetry lover in question, didn't wait to be contacted by the legal department (assuming it would even have happened) and contacted city authorities himself.
After a preliminary (and very small really) legal spat, a nonprofit organization in Washington, D.C. got involved: Public Knowledge.
They confirmed that Fisher was right about it being public domain, and that there were precedents to what Fisher had done as well. Legally, he was in the right.
Sioux Falls city authorities and the Mayor's office came around to the idea eventually (though not officially, it seems) and haven't brought up the matter since. All in all, a fairly dicey anecdote that could have been done without.
However, the event brings to light the need for the rules of what can and can't be 3D printed to be properly spelled out at some point, as it's still so ambiguous that legitimate endeavors like this one can land on hot coals.
We can't blame 3D printed guns for this one, but they are a good analogy
3D printed guns may have become the main source of controversy in the 3D printing industry, but while they did spark the need to define what sho uld and shouldn't be 3D printed (by the common man that is), that matter is too far removed to have any relevance here.
However, the problem is ultimately the same: 3D printing is a very ambiguous area in terms of legality, as every object that isn't based on an original CAD model can be considered copyright infringement.
It doesn't help that widespread, free use could cause much of the toy selling business to collapse. Art duplicate creation and selling may just go through the same.
Update January 22, 2015: Ammended the title.