Not Ranked
I don't think 3D Printing will change anything, manufacturing processes have been evolving since the industrial revolution, whether to produce an original or replicate it. So throw out the CNC machines and fire up the 3D Printers, what's different in the output?
1. An original design/concept
2. A replication of an original design/concept
Where it makes sense, the owner of the original design/concept will have Intellectual Property protection in-place, the Patent & Trademark office isn't going anywhere.
Pretend 3D Printers were already fully integrated into production facilities when Shelby took FFR to court (2002). Do you think anything below would have changed, I don't.
Result: Factory Five being allowed to continue building cars as long as it made no reference to the terms "Cobra," "427 S/C," "Shelby," "Shelby Cobra," "Daytona Coupe" or "Daytona Coupe Cobra."
As I see it you are right back to square one if you want to use the same name, 3rd party suppliers will be forced to put some sort of qualifier with the product's name to separate it from the original.
As far as how the market would receive 3D copies, being essentially an exact copy (including materials), the OEM will have to price competitively to not be undersold by the 3D competition. If the 3D competition has sharp material scientists & chem engineers working for them then their 3D replication should trump the OEM's due to superior strength & durability. You can also bet they will be going for Intellectual Property protection with that new 3D recipe.
|