Fully plastic guns are banned in the United States by the Undetectable Firearms Act, because they can pass unseen through metal detectors - a huge problem. One way around this is to insert a slip of metal into the gun, thereby making it detectable by metal detectors. 3D-printed guns made of metal - were that possible - would not violate the law.
The patents that cover Lego bricks have expired, so you are free to print bricks using the same interlocking system. You are even allowed to offer such prints commercially.
What is not allowed (and a violation of trademark law) is to call them "Lego bricks" or use Lego's logo. "Compatible with Lego" on the other hand, would be fine.
I am not an attorney, so this isn't legal advice. Like any legal question, you should consult with an actual attorney, who can consider all the gory details.
That said, it seems like you've got the BY and SA parts covered. "Non-commercial" is more difficult: does a sale that's not for profit count as "commercial"?
The Creative Commons site (https://...
I agree that intellectual property is complex. I am not a lawyer, but have been in the middle of patent and copyright actions.
In my non-legal opinion, you are providing a printing service for which you are free to charge your customer whatever you agree on. You are not responsible for the disposition of the resulting objects. You do not know how your ...
Intellectual property law is complex, so you might want to consider getting proper legal advice. However, to respect the original designer's intent you need to look at what their license permits and try not to find a loophole in the process. There is nothing to stop you asking the designer (in public or private) to clarify their intent.
The biggest 'non-...
While better fitted to our friends at law.SE, the general gist is: No.
Art is protected by copyright, and any adaption (derivative work) requires the OK from the right holders per se. Only 70-75 years after the death of the author (or publication for company works), a work enters the public domain and the copyright expires.
There are some exceptions (fair ...
Good luck with that.
Issues you will face:
using a G-code editor (or built-in printer software) to create multiple copies of the object in a single print session
user writing the printer file to an SD card, then block-copying the SD card
defining a "print". Specifically:
is #2 another functional copy of the object, or did #1 fail? Failed prints happen a ...
This question is really a legal question, and could apply to any cloned parts/devices rather than being 3D printer specific, and a generic counterfeit consumer goods based question should be asked on SE.Law. However, as you rightly state, a lot of 3D printers from China may contain (whether knowingly sourced or not by the manufacturer1) counterfeit parts, be ...
I am Not a Lawyer, the stack does not give legal advice, consult a licensing lawyer and the maker to check your use is within the licensing agreeming or make a seperate one
Read your license
The license CreativeCommons specifies BY-NC-SA as:
BY = Attribute. You may share and modifiy it, as long as you tell who made it.
NC = Non Commercial
SA = ...
I've informed myself a bit about this and found out the following:
It is good that you state the Name/Website or any Reference about original creator
Creative Commons absolutely requires this, even if you don't charge anything for your prints.
So, whether you are trying selling your print or not, you should still always do this.
You are not allowed to sell ...
There are two aspects to this question that probably should be addressed separately. This is not legal advice and I'm not a lawyer, so consult with an experienced IP attorney.
Copyright law may apply, and other IP laws, such as patents and trademarks, may apply. They each have different requirements and restrictions.
Notably, IP law varies from country ...
Again, I'm not a specialist in intellectual property law (or any other sort of lawyer), but I have a different interpretation.
There is a potential difference between the use of the product, and the use of the derivatives of the product. For example, GCC has a restrictive (open) license, but its OK (in some contexts) to use the compiled code in a commercial ...
Porosity Control - The ability of a 3d printer to produce a variable infil rate (e.g. 20%) is covered by a Stratasys utility patent.
Seam Hiding - The ability of a 3d printer to start printing from a different point on the perimeter such that no seam appears on the printed part, is covered by a Stratasys ...
Safety is not the same as legality
Something might be perfectly safe, but it doesn't make it legal to do or allowed to use. Parking your car over double-yellow lines is one example that is perfectly safe but violates the traffic codes.
Any 3D printed box would violate for example WAC 296-46B-300, as it isn't in compliance with NEC Class 3 Standard.
I haven't tested the commercial "blue boxes" used to hold 120/240 V electrical outlets, switches, and splices to see how they behave when heated. As such, this argument is based on intuition, which is intrinsically flawed as a logic device. Never-the-less, I think the no extruded molten plastic (FFF) 3D printing filament will work.
The purpose of the ...
IANAL, naturally, so take this with that in mind.
From what I've read and been instructed, any software which is licenced as non-commercial cannot be redistributed or incorporated into any commercial software product. The other thing about "noncommercial" software licenses is that they can't be used for corporate design work -- as opposed to home user ...
No. Such figures are generally covered by copyright, which means that nobody but the copyright holder is allowed to (re-)produce copies of the work. Copyright also covers personal use. In the US there are limited fair use exceptions but they do not apply here.
The only way to do this legally is if it is specifically authorized in a license or if you get ...