3D printing and copyright: back to square one

After many years, the resulting copyright issues have been solved (with time and pain). But now it seems to have started all over again with a new innovation: 3D printing.

3D printing is exactly what the name suggests. Instead of printing a piece of paper, or burning a CD or DVD, entire objects can be printed. Although the technical workings are (naturally) quite complex, the 3D printer uses a digital 3D model (a CAD file) to print the object. The technology has many possibilities. But, as with all other forms of printing and copying, there is a catch: copyright.

Most countries—if not all—are unprepared for the coming of 3D printing, and that includes the Netherlands. Under the Dutch Copyright Act (DCA), which features articles more than 100 years old, whenever a work is original and the personal ‘mark’ of its creator can be found in that work, the work is copyright protected. A work is defined in Article 10 which mentions, for example, books, music, movies, works of art, etc. A work of art can, basically, be anything.

3D printing has not yet evolved to the point where very complicated creations can be printed. Consider, for example, the mechanical parts of an object, or the internal composition which makes the object do what it does. As with all modern-day advances, technology catches up quickly. But even so, just being able to print a simple 3D object means that copyright infringement is possible. Think, for example, of the design of a chair. Consumers will be able to print all the extra chairs they need once 3D printers are readily available.

But can copying the design of a chair be considered copyright infringement? The DCA gives the copyright holder the exclusive right to duplicate his or her work. The fact that a CAD file is needed in the middle of the duplication process does not seem to matter, as the result of the duplication process is the same. But whether the information in a CAD file about the copyrighted work can be considered a duplication of a work remains to be seen. It can be argued that a CAD file is just a temporally digital version of a work. On the other hand, the information in the file contains the elements needed to be able to print the object (one of the reasons why libraries don’t like photos of their books being taken), and can therefore be copied by anyone. In that second situation, the DCA provides, even at its respectable age, copyright protection.

3D printing may also have an impact on, for example, the arts. Article 16b of the DCA currently allows for the free duplication of copyrighted works of literature, science or art, as long as this is for personal use. This could mean that a sculpture could be scanned in a CAD file, which could then be printed by anyone for free personal use.

When downloading music and movie files became widespread, the DCA was ‘enriched’ with Articles 16d and e, which provided for a tax on recordable discs. The resulting tax is distributed among copyright owners who suffer financially as a result of the ease of copying music and movie files. Perhaps it is time (on a European scale?) to implement such a tax for 3D printers as well.

"whether the information in a CAD file about the copyrighted work can be considered a duplication of a work remains to be seen."

3D printing has not yet become available in the Netherlands on a scale sufficient to elicit a ruling. Case law around the world has also been limited. About a year ago, the US TV network HBO sent a letter to an individual who had created a CAD file based on a throne used in a TV series. With the CAD file, a 3D printer was able to create a mobile phone dock in the shape of the throne used in the TV series, which HBO regarded as infringing its copyright.

Without a doubt, 3D printing can result in copyright infringement, but many questions remain. As current regulations provide no guidelines on how to deal with 3D printing, it seems we are back to square one. However, in the Netherlands, although 3D printing is not mentioned anywhere in the law, the DCA will provide protection for copyright holders, as it has with all previous developments in the digital world.

Michiel Rijsdijk is a partner at Arnold + Siedsma. He can be contacted at: mrijsdijk@arnold-siedsma.com