Re: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision(longish)

[Scott A Crosby <crosby(at)qwes.math.cmu.edu>]

On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Claus Fischer wrote:

>
> As opposed to other forms of instruction, like recipes and
> blueprints, where the functional aspect is not so immediate.
>
> Perhaps it would be good to argue that for many forms of
> speech (blueprings, cooking recipes) machines can be
> constructed which do the same (shove in normed blueprint,
> press button, get result); the only technical aspect here is

Such machine exist commercially:
  http://www.google.com/search?q=3d+prototyping+

For a quick description of the technology,
  http://www.spectrum3d.com/sla_disc.html


3D rapid prototyping machines. Feed them a blueprint for a 3d object, and
they build a model. there are many variants, I know of ones that can build
paper, plastic, and there may be ones that can build metal. There's one in
the building next to me.

So, you could, say, feed in the blueprint of a sharp knife into such a 3d
plastic prototyping system, wait a bit, and pull out a plastic knife
(undetectable in an X-ray)... Or, have it build some plastic doo-dad that
literally breaks into a knife-like object.

The one referenced above can build any object fitting in a 20x20x23 well.

So, since blueprints are now fully functional, have they lost copyright?

Scott