Lesson on legal issues in DiDIY
Lesson about legal issues in DiDIY by Elena Falletti, at the Greenwich University of London, in the context of the Erasmus teaching mobility programme
WARNING: this page is part of a full, STATIC copy of the official website of the DiDIY Project, that ended in June 2017. Please read the note attached to the File Index to know more.
Lesson about legal issues in DiDIY by Elena Falletti, at the Greenwich University of London, in the context of the Erasmus teaching mobility programme
(to know and discuss the conclusions of our H2020 research, please participate to the DiDIY Final Conference "Digital Makers – Making a Difference?")
Here's a message from Michigan Tech's researcher and lecturer Joshua Pierce:
In an attempt to make patents even marginally useful we have just created an open source free inactive patent search. Roughly 1/2 of US patents become inactive before the 20 year mark because owners don't pay fees on time.
Digital DIY creates new rights and responsibilities for its practitioners and technology producers, but also for its (maybe unaware!) end users, that is for everybody who uses, or is "exposed to" any product manufactured thanks to Digital DIY.
- The work on ethics in Digital DIY is accessible on our central page on ethics -
An important development (*) that may have serious impacts on many forms of Digital DIY:
[In July 2016] the UK government extended copyright for designs from 25 years to the life of the designer plus 70 years. In practice, this is likely to mean a copyright term of over 100 years for furniture and other designed objects.
More input to our ongoing analysis of "DiDIY vs gun control" issues comes from the so-called Imura case in Japan. Quoting 3ders:
Digitally enabled Do-it-Yourself equipment, therapies and other healthcare procedures are becoming more and more common. Let's look at just a few, very recent examples first, and then at the questions they pose for our research.