Skip to main content
Login | Suomeksi | På svenska | In English

Browsing by Subject "3D printing"

Sort by: Order: Results:

  • Kallela, Karla (2021)
    3D printing has been described as a revolutionary technology challenging copyright law to the core. 3D printing essentially enables the fast reproduction of objects and enables transforming digital items into physical ones effortlessly. This thesis examines the copyright status of a computer-aided design (CAD) file, which functions as the blueprint and instructions for a 3D printer. Such a file carries information about the design it contains, and a 3D printer may read these instructions and produce the digital item in physical, three-dimensional form. The core of this thesis is to examine whether a CAD file fits within the scope of application of copyright law and further inspects the repercussions of copyright protection being granted for such files. Moreover, the writer suggests practical interpretations and changes as to how copyright law should be interpreted for the regime to be better adapted to technological change in the future. In this thesis, the writer concludes that based on the Finnish Copyright Act (404/1961) and Directive 2001/29/EC as well as applicable case law developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), there is nothing precluding treating such a file as subject matter which may be protected under the national (and EU) copyright regime. This interpretation is in fact encouraged from the basis of applicable case by the CJEU, such as cases C-5/08 Infopaq, C-355/12 Nintendo, C-310/17 Levola and C‑683/17 Cofemel. For something to constitute protectable subject matter, the focal point is for the expression to be contained with sufficient precision and objectivity and more importantly, that the expression constitutes the intellectual creation of its author. With regard to the repercussions of this protection, it is clear that should a CAD file be protected by way of a copyright, a 3D item produced from such a file should either constitute a reproduction or derivative work of such a file. Further, the writer suggests that in order to provide a clear framework for operators in the field, a position paper similar to the one adopted by the European Communities Trade Mark Association in April 2021 as regards design law and 3D printing should be developed. In addition, it is recommended that rightholders take proactive measures in safeguarding their works by adapting business models so that their authentic products are offered by way of different licensing models to combat piracy, similar to the solution developed in the music industry after peer-to-peer online sharing posed troubles for the industry. In the event of the true mass commercialization of 3DP, a centralized body to monitor the industry should be developed, one that establishes functioning licensing models to benefit rightholders. Finally, the FCA should be interpreted in a truly technologically neutral manner. It is likely that such an interpretation will however not fix all the issues copyright law is posed with, and thus, a cohesive copyright reform may be necessary in the future.