Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Emerging Legal Issues in 3D Printing and Product Liability
3D printing, sometimes known as additive manufacturing, allows for objects of all shapes and sizes to be created by applying different materials ' such as plastics, resins or metals ' in successive layers. The technology can be used to create trinkets, jewelry, and other small objects and novelties, but it can also be used to create more complex and sophisticated products, including medical devices and even firearms.
The technology has been developing quickly, and 3D printers that were once prohibitively expensive are now becoming available at price points that suggest the technology will soon become accessible to many consumers. In 2012, President Obama launched the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute to develop 3D printing technologies and products. Businesses, from start-ups to giants like Hewlett-Packard, are among those now getting in on the action.
As with any advance in technology, 3D printing gives rise to myriad legal issues. How, for example, will intellectual property rights be enforced if anyone with a 3D printer can create replicas of objects, such as sculptures and patented devices? Do the fruits of 3D printing comply, or not comply, with current regulatory regimes? For example, do 3D-printed guns run afoul of U.S. federal law that prohibits firearms that are not detectable by “walk-through metal detectors”? See 18 U.S.C. ' 922(p)(1). And who will be held liable if objects created through the use of 3D printing technology, and distributed to consumers and other users, turn out to be defective and unreasonably dangerous?
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?