Say I find a patented invention that I can easily recreate, for instance using my 3D printer. Can I make this for my own personal use? I’m not asking wether that patent is enforceable in that case, but is it technically legal? Can I share the files for free so others can easily recreate the invention themselves?
Comments
You cannot.
Your unauthorized reproduction itself counts as a “commercial” loss, and therefore patent infringement, as you didn’t pay a licensing fee or purchase the product but have the use of it.
It’s extremely unlikely you as an individual will be sued, but if you start releasing files specifically designed to encourage patent infringement you absolutely will be.
In answer to:
>I’m not asking wether that patent is enforceable in that case, but is it technically legal?
The patent is enforceable because it is illegal.
Not experience but for private use should be fine, but shared file could be taken down
Yes, creating a device that is under patent is patent infringement. Patent protection only lasts for 20 years.
Realistically though, don’t sell it and nobody will notice or care.
No. A patent protects the invention in many ways.
From the USPTO
>What is a patent?
>A U.S. patent gives you, the inventor, the right to “exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling” an invention or “importing” it into the U.S.
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/essentials#questions
Note the right to exclude others from using/making an invention. And commerce is a separate call-out
Patents are required to include a description of how to use the idea, the description must be good enough for someone in that field to use the idea. This means that the plan you’re referring to exists in the public-by-nature patent itself.
Pretty sure you can sell your own draft plans as that is probably *helping* the patent holder as you are doing design work for their would be licensees.
Consider that someone may have designed a better wood screw; you design a cabinet that uses those screws’ unique advantage which is patented. You sell those plans. You are not causing harm to the patent holder, you are adding value to it.
IANAL but that’s my understanding.
You could also design a competing screw that does not violate that patent as it uses a different design to achieve the same functionality. You could even patent your design and make money licensing it if say it is cheaper to produce or works better.
Recreating the patented object for personal use is still unauthorized recreation. You could be sued, but almost certainly won’t because how could they know? If you start posting on reddit or TikTok showing everyone what you did, you’d be sent a cease and dissist immediately, and probably sued soon afterward.
The second you start distributing the plans to others, you’re opening yourself up to an even bigger lawsuit.
Think about it. If what you are suggesting was legal, a rival company could put another out of business simply by distributing the plans for their rivals patented device to everyone so no one bothers to buy the original.
It’s technically illegal.
A lot of people think that “no money!” Is some sort of defense. It actually isn’t.
But no one is going to know and these things are enforced in civil court. This means de facto there’s really no danger to you as long as you keep it private even though de jure it’s not allowed.
This is the sort of “jaywalking” type of thing about IP law. It’s all set up for companies to sue companies because there really was no danger of individuals doing much damage on their own in private.
I’m sure there’s already a “Napster” type of site for pirating 3-D printer files.
U.S. patent owners can prevent others from making, using, selling, or offering to sell anything covered by the patent claims (described by the numbered paragraphs at the end of the patent). Most patent owners don’t go after individual users, however. For example, if Apple has a patent on a something a Samsung smartphone performs, technically it is the end-user/consumer who is “using” the patented invention but it is impractical and unpopular to sue individual end-users. Instead, Apple could sue Samsung for contributing to and inducing Samsung phone users to violate the patent without Apple having to sue the individuals.
There’s an argument that even you creating it for yourself is a commercial use, because it takes away one otherwise customer of the patented invention. This kind of theory has been upheld to allow Congress to regulate interstate commerce where no actual commerce has occured, but afaik has never come up in regards to patent protection. Realistically it would be impossible for a patent holder to even find out you were infringing.
Distributing the design for free publicly OTOH absolutely violates the patent and the holder could pursue damages from you.
In the legal world, no you shouldn’t recreate it. BUT…….
If you print it in your home and tell no one about it…..how would anyone know?
As long as you don’t make money, or interfere with the patent holder from loosing money (ie, you make the part and give it away for free) you should be okay.
Just don’t advertise you are doing it. Lets put it this way, someone will take action against you when the lawyer costs are less than what they are loosing because of you.
For example. You make a part that costs 5 cents. And you only make this once and only for yourself. The profit on that 5c part was say 3cents to the company. Do you think they will spend even 1h of a lawyers billable rate to get their 3cents from you? And to sue would be more than just 1hr billable rate……
So….Is it legal, no. Will you get caught if you do it once and just for yourself? Likely not.
As others said. Don’t sell it or advertise you did it. Just do it and keep your mouth shut.
Scrutinize the claims in the patent (assuming a utility patent). It may be possible to easily work around the actual invention(s) that is(are) claimed in the patent. Many patents are very weak or very narrowly defined.
Printing it for yourself is probably fine. Publishing it is kind of commercial activity, even if you’re not selling it, as it’s enabling other people to not purchase the protected item.
Recreating something that’s under an active patent without the patent holders permission for any purpose is illegal.
In reality, as long as youre not selling it and dont publicise what youre doing they’re not going to be able to know or enforce the patent on you. Also, if you are keeping it strictly for your own use they’re unlikely to spend the time and resources to come after you, easier to turn a blind eye.
I really would not distribute the files though, that’s more likely to get attention.
How would anybody possibly know what you’ve done if you’re not selling or advertising it? The technical answer is that, yes, it is illegal, but in reality, nobody knows, nobody cares.
Depends on the laws of each country.
In e.g. France, personal non commercial manufacturing of a patented product is treated as an exception, and is legal.
In the US it’s not.
It depends on how it is used and in what industry. For example, in pharma, we often make patented drugs to compare them to our potential new drugs. We just can’t claim them as our own. It is part of the public benefit for allowing companies to patent drugs because the rest of the industry can learn from each other.
No. A patent covers any use, sale (with some limits), import, or manufacture of the invention — commercial or otherwise.
A patent does NOT give you a license to make / use / sell your invention. It prevents others from doing those things. It’s an important distinction. Your invention might include or require another invention in the making / use / sale of your invention, in which case you may be prevented by someone elses patents from doing those things. You may well be in a position where you have to license other patents to make / use / sell the thing you patented (very frequently the case).
A patent for an item that you can easily manufacture is enforceable. You can distribute plans on how to manufacture said item for free, after all, the original patent should already provide all that documentation to the public, but to actually print and use the thing requires a license from the patent holder.
Hey there! That’s a great question about patents! Let’s imagine a patent is like a special coloring book.
The person who invented something new, like a really cool crayon holder, gets to make that coloring book. Their patent says, “This crayon holder design is MINE!”
Now, if you buy the crayon holder from the inventor, you can color with it all you want! That’s like using the invention commercially – they sold it to you, and you’re using it.
But if you make your own copy of the crayon holder using the special instructions (like copying the coloring book picture), even if just for yourself, you’re technically breaking the rules of the coloring book. It’s still the inventor’s special design, even if you don’t plan on selling your copy.
And sharing the special instructions (the design files) with your friends so they can make copies is also breaking the rules, even if you don’t ask for any money. You’re helping other people copy the inventor’s special crayon holder design.
So, to answer your question directly: A patent protects the invention, even if you just make it for yourself. Making and sharing copies without permission isn’t legal, even if you don’t sell them. It’s like tracing the crayon holder picture from the inventor’s special coloring book and giving that tracing to your friends. The inventor still owns the design.
While the patent technically prevents anyone from making the item for any reason. If you are able to recreate it and make it and dont sell it to anyone or show it off on YouTube, the old “what they dont know can’t hurt you” clause comes into play. Do what you want.
> Say I find a patented invention that I can easily recreate, for instance using my 3D printer. Can I make this for my own personal use?
No, patent protects the patent owner from even getting inspired by it, let alone making it. (but who will know IF YOU DONT TALK ABOUT IT AND DONT SHARE IT)?
> I’m not asking wether that patent is enforceable in that case
It is enforceable. The patent tells you how to make something and how it operates so that you can prove someone infringed it if it does the same thing in the same way (gross simplification)
> But is it technically legal?
Absolutely not
> Can I share the files for free so others can easily recreate the invention themselves?
Hell no. That’s distribution, modification…
Technically it excludes private use of the invention. Practically, it’s unlikely you’d be sued for copying an invention for your own use.
To start with the patent owner has to be know that you infringed their patent. Then they have to sue you for what would be a tiny amount of damages.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some company in America has sued an individual for non-commercial infringment of a patent for their own use. It would be very rare though.
That depends on your country of residence. In the US, the answer is no. Within the EU, the answer is yes, if the patented invention is used by you, personally, for non-commercial purposes. And yes, you can share that design, as long as there is no profit or commercial interest.
One rather famous example is the first public RepRap project producing the Mendel 3d printer. Their project had a wiki page where the nuances were explained. Had the project been US-based, it would have been illegal.
Easy example, peer to peer file sharing is non commercial activity but it unambiguously falls outside legal use under intellectual property right laws.
So in your example if you’re disseminating the plans online to make that patent protected item you would run afoul of the law.
Nobody can check and nobody will come after you if you make a private copy and use it especially if you don’t make money with it. It’s a bit like recording a song from the radio and playing it for yourself.
Also, at least in my field (biotech) you can use patented stuff for benchmarking so I did that sometimes.
Patents don’t protect anything anymore – see TiVo vs Dish. First mover is more important. Best implementation is more important. Having a customer base and related products and services is more important. Having money to pay lawyers to delay and delay and delay while you make serious bank infringing is very important. Ultimately, Dish made so much money during the long delays that they could more easily have bought TiVo and then paid the judgement to themselves than to pay it and let TiVo live on. IMHO it would have been a mercy killing. Mind you TiVo made a lot of other mistakes along the way.
I know people that have a very strong and broad patent on a now widely deployed technology. None of the people that are infringing are paying them anything and never will because they can all afford enough lawyers to totally bankrupt the patent holder.
The world is so different than it was when patents were first created.
patents only do something if you have money to back it up with lawyers. a bigger company can come in, screw your patent and if they have the means, screw you in court.
In the US there is a limited “research” exemption which allows use of patented inventions for “amusement, to satisfy idle curiosity, or for strictly philosophical inquiry.”. This a narrow exception and can only be used as a defense after you actually get sued.
Part of owning a patent is being willing to sue over it. Especially when you’re dealing with easy knock offs it becomes untenable to enforce it.
Many companies use trade secrets instead as they don’t have to reveal how it works. Like coke and pepsi in theory could patent their soda recipes and processes however it would be expensive to enforce and only protected for a limited time. It’s better off keeping everything secret as it’s hard figure out their recipes.
there have been incidents of one farmers monsanto patent seeds blowing into a neighboring farmers field who let the seeds grow and was successfully sued for illegally using patented seeds without consent of the patent holder…. so….no the patent is protected no matter the use. in the case of the seeds they are designed to tolerate a specific pesticide which said wouldn’t have used since most of crop wasnt designed so, even though the seeds were just seeds to him, he was still not licensed to use the patented product.
Essentially a patent technically protects an infection every way, however enforcement is an entirely different subject. Should you stumble across a very well protected patent that you can sneak below the radar of enforcement you’re pretty much ok. But the minute they notice you. There’s a very different scenario that includes people taking past value.
Technically if the patent is still enforceable (hasn’t expired) the owner could go after you for making it or sharing the files. In reality if you just make it for yourself and no one knows, they probably won’t. If you publish the files on line or make a YouTube video or instructables that says “hey I made this cool thing” and especially if you say ”and here’s how you can make it.” That would be painting a huge target on your back and asking to get sued.
Lots of US defaultism here. Let me just remind everybody that what seems to be the consensus in the replies does not apply world wide. Different countries, different nuances to their patent laws.
Here in Denmark, I’m free to use any patented invention, as long as it is for personal or non-commercial use.
The World Intellectual Property Organization agrees:
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/scp/en/scp_18/scp_18_3.pdf (section 1,5)
That exclusion of private and non-commercial use is included in the EPO directives.
I was surprised to hear that patents also conflict with personal use, and indeed, that seems to be the case in the US but not in (some? most?) European countries.
Sharing the files (free or not) would be a different story, and since you’d presumably make them available globally, you’d be opening yourself up for problems from all jurisdictions. I’m not sure about the exact situation (since you’re not distributing the item, just the description how to make one) – it sounds like in the US you’d definitely be in trouble, while in Germany at least a decade ago the law wasn’t fully settled yet .