Alright, I got this MPCNC built, it moves,
it cuts, you were able to follow the entire build process live here on YouTube. Last week, I was out filming a few project
and when I got back, I wanted to actually tune this thing in and get it to cut well. Because what we were seeing on the last livestream
was that there was an enormous amount of chatter and just bouncyness in the toolhead, especially
in the aluminum cut, but also already in MDF, I know even from flimsier machines, that shouldn’t
be that way, but somehow, this machine was just not rigid enough to mill into the material. And yeah, I did build this one slightly larger
than they normally are, but what I was noticing was that the belt and the way the belt was
mounted introduced a lot of flex into the drive system. Like, I could easily stretch the entire belt
assembly by a millimeter or two, even with the zip tie as tight tight as possible. Now, in the comments, you guys have already
suggest a bunch of different areas where my machine could also have issues, like these
long M8 bolts that are used in the carriage having a smooth shaft instead of being threaded
all the way through, which could have the carriage flex more than usual, but I wanted
to go step by step, fix the obvious issues with my machine first and try and understand
the MPCNC a bit more during all that. And I thought it would a good start and an
easy fix for the belt with a new printed part that would directly clamp the belt with no
zip ties. But it wasn’t that easy. While I was already drawing a new part, I
wanted to go ahead and work on a few other challenges that I ran into during the build,
like the fact that there are only a handful size options available for tubing, none of
which are really as cheaply available here as metal conduit is in the US, the fact that
almost none of the nut traps were grabbing the lock nuts properly and I’d had to jam
a screwdriver in there to hold them, and a few of the parts only seem to be made for
imperial-sized hardware from the start, not metric. So I started in Fusion 360, created a new
parametric design and drew up the first part, one of these corner pieces with adjustable
wall thickness, screw size, rod diameter, and, of course, it has the belt just pushed
in sideways with no zip ties or anything. Worked great, so I tweeted about it, was like,
hey I created this part, if anyone wants to use it, here’s the Fusion360 design, I’m
sharing this as Creative Commons 0 aka public domain, print it, modify it, include it in
your project, you don’t even have to give credit for it, basically, do whatever you
want with it. And here’s where it got complicated. Because Ryan of V1 Engineering, he designed
the the original MPCNC parts, came in and was like, “Hey Tom, you can’t actually
release these parts as public domain, they’re a derivative work of my original parts, so
you need to release them as Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.” Now, just to be clear, I didn’t just import
the original stls into Fusion, chop off the zip tie brace and add the belt slot, this
part is designed from the ground up. I spent a couple hours on the design to work
out kinks with being able to adjust the dimensions as parameters without the whole design falling
apart, and yeah, it does look like the original because it fits the other original parts and,
honestly, there just aren’t a whole lot of other options to design a part that does
the job of holding a belt right there and clamping down onto a section of tubing at
the same time. We’ll actually come back to that later. So what followed on Twitter was two days of
discussion between Ryan and me of what is a derivative design and what is not, who holds
copyright to what and what the morally right thing to do was – and you can still read the
entire conversation, I’ve linked that below. Now, obviously, I don’t think this part
counts as a derivative design from the original MPCNC, but what Ryan kept pointing out is
that he basically considers any part a derivative of the original as long as it fits onto the
other parts because the dimensions and positions of features are the same as the original. So I was like, ok, if you’re saying that
any part that does the same job is a derivative, and that would require me to only release
my design as Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial, too, then so be it. But then please do respect that license and
don’t use my original work commercially, either, including in derivatives. Now if we follow that line of thought, Ryan
owns the copyright to this area, I own the copyright to that, and in the end, nobody
gets to use it. I thought holding up a mirror would show how
ridiculous this entire thing would be, but instead Ryan accused me of wanting to destroy
his MPCNC project. Like, what? So, just to be clear, I started out by wanted
to release my design with no restrictions for everyone to use, for the MPCNC community
and for whoever wants to make the part, there’s also an awesome community supporting this
channel, so whenever I spend my time and design something, I want it to be available for as
many people as possible. And for me, that means releasing as open-source. A non-commercial license isn’t considered
open-source because it comes with so many restrictions in how you can use a design,
for example for educational use, in a makerspace that, yes, usually has member fees, or in
any other context where someone is making money with it. For example, me even building the MPCNC on
this channel is a pretty grey area because I am “using” the parts in videos and livestreams
that, at the end of the day, put food on my table. Thankfully, I do have implicit permission
in that case. I have no intention of harming any project
that enables people to do awesome things, in fact, I want the MPCNC to be as awesome
as possible, which is why I started making modified parts in first place. But it looks like, for the time being, the
MPCNC is going to be Ryan’s project alone, with him wanting control over the entire thing. And he obviously made it pretty clear that
he didn’t want me “interfering” with that by making open-source, compatible parts. Now, there is still that little detail in
copyright where if a part only has a certain shape, because it has to do a certain job,
copyright just doesn’t apply to it. That’s why, for example, your car’s brake
discs aren’t protected by copyright from Ford or someone, because the shape they have
is not “design” in the artsy way, it’s purely function, and copyright only applies
to “art” and creative work in the widest sense. I’m pretty sure that, aside from the MPCNC
logo on here, these parts are very much only functional, too, so copyright really wouldn’t
hold up. I’m certain that all things considered,
I did nothing wrong, but I’m going to respect the fact that Ryan doesn’t want this. So that’s what I’m going to do, unfortunately,
this means I won’t be spending any more time on this MPCNC, the only thing left to
do is to take this machine apart. I’m sure I’ll find a new home for the
spindle, electronics and all that. Again, my intent was to make the machine better,
more flexible, more accessible and of course I don’t care if this belt clip thing makes
it into the official design or even ends up being sold as the MPCNC. I mean, after all, this design was CC-0 to
start. And that even includes use in projects with
a restrictive license, too. So while I’m un-building this machine, I
want to say thank you to my supporters over on Patreon. This month, a shoutout goes out to
alephobjects Adam Green
Ken Graham Kurt Wubbels
Sean Berry Robert Baum
nm creator James Koch
Filip Goc neil youngberg
Brian Raker Andrey
Jimmy Lee Matthew Oswald
Dorian Gray Olivares
Mike McGee James C. Foley
Jonathan Malin Markus Harms
Andy Fair Robert Hornburg
Jeffrey Nikoletich Filastruder
Christopher Day Rudolff Vang
Paul Arden William Devine
Francisco Peebles and everyone else who’s directly supporting
the channel on Patreon, through YouTube memberships or even just watches and shares my videos. So thank you all for watching, I’ll see
you in the next one.

Whose design even is this? (MPCNC conclusion)
Tagged on:                                                                                                                                 

100 thoughts on “Whose design even is this? (MPCNC conclusion)

  • September 11, 2019 at 11:43 am
    Permalink

    One note on the video: While I was editing this one, I noticed that I had originally misread one of Ryan's tweets. The video is edited to reflect that, but its tone is still a bit harsher than I'd like.
    All things considered, the MPCNC is not the right project for me, but I still wish Ryan all the best with it.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:26 pm
    Permalink

    Well, that is sad… Especially the end of video when everything disappeared desintegrated in the boxes. :-/ But I understand you and you have my support in this. I hope you will find some another (fully) open-source CNC or you will build your own. 🙂

    P. S. When we start with absurdity of this licence… Is even legal that he is selling parts for this machine commercially? I didn't find any exception in CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 for commercial use, even for author himself. 😉

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:26 pm
    Permalink

    Wow…. No Bueno. I've been watching Thomas's videos for as long as I've owned a 3d printer, and I built my MPCNC a month after getting the printer… I feel so torn!… I'm glad it's already built. mine works very well. no chatter milling with dw660, laser burning and cutting with 2.3w laser, I even tried chocolate 3d printing with it too.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:33 pm
    Permalink

    I've run into this before. And this is why I refuse to recognize or follow "non-commercial" or "non-derivitive" creative commons licences because I feel that totally defeats the whole purpose of open source. Does that make me a bad guy? Probably, but its crud like this that pisses me off. I once released a video on YouTube that was with an attribution based open source license that someone ripped off without me having attribution and YouTube refused to defend me saying I released it as "open source".

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:33 pm
    Permalink

    Sad, fortunately I prefer designs that use extrusions anyway.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:36 pm
    Permalink

    And to be fair your part is NOT a derivative despite what that guy says. You designed it from the ground up. These issues get even more complicated when it involves architecture and a rendering of that architecture. Does it become art at that point? Can you restrict derivatives if your item is based on something that was not yours to begin with? I think not.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:37 pm
    Permalink

    It se3ms that if you read mpcnc forum thread, Ryan had an issue with Tom previously. I had hoped this video series would put an end to that. Guess not. Draw your lines and take your sides, etc but I enjoyed the videos. At least tom hasnt removed them from the YouTube because it will be a boon to have video documentation of how to build it and what design modifications you need to make and how it should look… All without actually releasing a design that shows what to make and what it should look like, lol. Nicely played Tom. 😉

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:39 pm
    Permalink

    Well, I guess I'm deleting the MPCNC source files… right now.
    Thomas, if you want to discuss a true open source CNC for DIY, I'd love to contribute. I have a few thoughts from watching you and Ivan Miranda build things over the years.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:42 pm
    Permalink

    It's not like someone couldn't just design a Mostly Printed CNC and come up with similar or better parts. There's a point where some company in china could copy this exactly and little could be done about it. In the internet age there's a short life expectancy of any copyrighted design. If you dont want it copied then dont put it out there, or hire a team of really aggressive lawyers. It's not like this was an original idea anyway, I'm willing to bet everyone with a 3d printer has considered this idea at some stage. Time for Ryan? to realise he's got what he can from it and let the community take over or risk having someone simply design their own with CC0

    Doesn't look like its that great a design anyway.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:44 pm
    Permalink

    Sad that trying to improve something and share it causes so much controversy. Won't be doing this project with that attitude. Thanks for the video and effort!

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:45 pm
    Permalink

    Don't you guys in Europe have the concept of "fair use" in your Copyright Law? And I thought Copyright was now protected under an international agreement which surely has to recognize "Fair Use". In the US, Tom is completely in the clear on a copyright basis. I'm a die hard BSD license guy, viewing all the GPL stuff as WAY more complicated than it has to be. Best idea I've heard is "Copy Center" as enunciated by one of the BSD Unix guys: Take it down to the Copy Center and make all the copies you want!

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:45 pm
    Permalink

    I semi understand where he is coming from but I will not waste my money on this if I can't even make any updates for it and release them as that is what I do. So sorry for him but eff him.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:46 pm
    Permalink

    You can copy a Typeface but not it's name. Same applies here. Patent is a different story that is expensive and time consuming.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:49 pm
    Permalink

    A partly printable CNC in metric with hardware that is easily available in europe is needed!

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:54 pm
    Permalink

    Design your own one with your needs and make it open source 🙂 I'm sure yours would be more rigid than this one 🙂

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:55 pm
    Permalink

    Tom. Take a deep breath and step back.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:55 pm
    Permalink

    That sucks, 3dp community needs cool projects like this.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:56 pm
    Permalink

    I've lost count how many times I see my designs being sold on eBay despite publishing it as non commercial.

    I have international patents. They're only as strong as you defend them. And even then…

    My opinion. If you've made the thing from scratch. You own the model. Not the idea. Because at any given time someone else in the world has thought of the exact same thing.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:56 pm
    Permalink

    I thought it was strange that you were building a CNC machine and Stefan was testing filaments. :o}

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 10:58 pm
    Permalink

    You haven't done anything wrong in designing and releasing the part under whatever license you want and your offer to modify the license to be in the lines of the machine's designer was generous and I demonstrated your good intentions.

    That's really unfortunate, it was a fun build to watch.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:00 pm
    Permalink

    In short Ryan is just saying "I sell garbage that doesnt work and I want to keep it that way" that's fine as long as you note on your site that your CNC design is little more then a model project.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:03 pm
    Permalink

    Copyright only applies to his actual design files. You can't copyright the measurements, nor can you copyright functional designs (e.g., clothing can't be copyrighted). Any sort of "license" only applies to copyrightable elements (i.e., the design files*, not the design itself). He *might be able to get a patent if certain aspects are truly unique and non-obvious. This Ryan guy needs to consult with a lawyer about what he can legally protect and claim.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:12 pm
    Permalink

    Ryan that shot you fired… Well it's….. Inbedded in your foot well done please allow me to not build a mpcnc and design my own truly open source mill

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:31 pm
    Permalink

    Wow.. just wow. that is the kind of business model that will be swallowed alive in legal fees down the road.

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:36 pm
    Permalink

    Next step, fully open-source CNC machine, got it! 😆😉🙃 Sorry not sorry!

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:39 pm
    Permalink

    Now do an improvements video! I still wanted a reliable working MPCNC!!

    Reply
  • September 11, 2019 at 11:42 pm
    Permalink

    What! I've been dismantling parts like the one you show since I wore diapers!
    And that is a long time ago! I'm almost at the age where I will wear diapers again!
    Owning that design!? I don't know if I should laugh, cry or just sit here with eyes like tin platters.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:04 am
    Permalink

    Well MPCNC just shot themselves in the foot.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:04 am
    Permalink

    Money destroys all things.

    It is the complex square root of all evil.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:18 am
    Permalink

    That’s a shame. Goes against the whole maker movement. Looks like the MPC CNC is only good for cutting foam in its as designed state.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:23 am
    Permalink

    Someone just killed MPCNC! And guess what: It is not Thomas! Don‘t forget to step aside. A big backlash is coming.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:24 am
    Permalink

    Just wow. Did you consider consulting a lawyer? I don't know the law but I agree with your analysis of his claim. You solved a problem with a different solution but it shares similarity due to the constraints of the function.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:24 am
    Permalink

    Try RS-CNC ! Or take a look at the LongMill CNC! 😀

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:24 am
    Permalink

    Thanks Thomas for all that you do on this channel. It's too bad Ryan doesn't realize the power of social media platforms. I was thinking of building one as a laser cutter. Now I'm uncertain if I want to build something that is so tightly controlled. Ryan should be thanking you for publishing the build not admonishing you for trying to improve the design. Having worked in a Tool and Model shop with design engineers the worst designers were always the ones that had a "Not invented by me" attitude. The best were collaborative and would happily incorporate any improvement from anyone if it improved the design. I used to see this from a lot of young designers fresh out of school.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:25 am
    Permalink

    I have just received all my MPCNC parts for my build. I decided to support the project by buying the parts from MPCNC in the expectation that it was truly an open source project. After seeing this I deeply regret getting it. The design will not evolve rapidly to become better because Ryan can't understand the difference between what is effectively selling a copy under the pretence that it is the original, or an improved aftermarket part. ( The world if full of legitimate aftermarket parts that fit and work in original equipment) If Ryan truly cared about his creation, he would want to see it evolve to the best it could be. It is sad because what Ryan has created is really cool, and any advancements contributed by others would be part of his MPCNC legacy. I feel MPCNC will now slowly become a dinosaur. I am contemplating if I should even put mine together. Very sad.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:26 am
    Permalink

    I was gonna post a comment about how i was tired of you whining that it wasn’t open source. Now this happened and my mouth tastes like feet.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:27 am
    Permalink

    All parties involved should be ashamed of this spectacle. You have both set a bad example. The community loses, and it's the community that matters. Not you. Not your project. Not your channel. Not your ego.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:31 am
    Permalink

    Can’t say I’m not disappointed in both you and Ryan. I watched all your videos and believed you didn’t setup the “z” axis correctly. Forgot to tighten the bearing bolts. When you didn’t bother to really trouble shoot the chattering I realized you really weren’t really into making it work for you. I was really disappointed when you disassembled it . Ryan seemed PO’d for someone trying to improve his design. There are many designs on thingaversa already are improvements. Is he going after them also. This maker universe is based upon and survives on open exchange of ideas and designs. I realize Ryan is in business to make money from his design. Unfortunately he may have just killed the golden goose with the fight he picked with you.
    You both need to put this behind and get on with exchanging new ideas and designs to improve this maker world!

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:39 am
    Permalink

    Odear someone made an improvement, hope no one does it again.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:44 am
    Permalink

    Pretty sad when you get your hand slapped for improvements Keep doing what you do Tom. It’s not like you’re trying to take over or ruin a persons work.
    Open source is a way for something to be alive grow evolve.
    If man kind didn’t we’d still be afraid of fire living in caves

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:50 am
    Permalink

    The whole open-source thing made the 3d printing community what it is today. Tom only tried to help. In return, you give yourself a bad name, imo. Bringing up legal BS when he’s doing nothing but helping is a sure way to kill your ‘business’. GL, you’re gunna need it, Ryan.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:58 am
    Permalink

    Damn no mic drop

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 12:59 am
    Permalink

    "he basically considers any part a derivative of the original as long as it fits onto the other parts"…Sorry Ryan…It doesn't matter what YOU consider a derivative…it matters what the law considers a derivative. In this case I'm pretty sure it would side with Tom.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:00 am
    Permalink

    Well I guess parts bought for mine will wait for another design…

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:10 am
    Permalink

    This is not a great design to begin with – having built and fine tuned a CNC, I don't see the frame having the rigidity to cut anything beyond soft wood with conservative chip loads. I'd look at aluminium extrusion based designs – even those have issues when you're trying to work on soft metals.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:14 am
    Permalink

    I'm waiting on a new license to be created the "Everyone anywhere can use it for whatever the heck they want to use it for… except that guy from mpcnc license." aka the guy taking his ball and going home.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:16 am
    Permalink

    If it didn't appear on your channel, many of us wouldn't know about the MPCNC. A pity not to understand that. However, I'm glad to save my money on something that is not as good as it seemed. Cheer up Thomas.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:20 am
    Permalink

    I quite enjoyed the unbuild.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:28 am
    Permalink

    I can see both positions…. but this was a bit whiney, and the end of the video was a bit… dunno….. I hope you gave the parts to somebody who would else not have the possibility to get them. Trashing it would be a dickmove, not only ecological-wise.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:30 am
    Permalink

    A lot of these conduit designs were created by people who I don't think necessarily have engineering degrees or is they are engineers they aren't structural. Long unsupported thin wall beams are basically the worst choice for this application. I understand why they picked it for the "bearing" choice, but this design is super flawed from the start. Aluminum extrusions has a hope of working, but even that won't produce the results a good, heavey, cast iron design can. 3d printed printers though, they see such little tool pressure they are often "rigid" enough to get away with these poor designs.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:37 am
    Permalink

    After seeing this and the videos on how the plastic bits of the CNC can possibly get warm and cause the router to get misaligned, gouge into the work piece and set itself on fire I think I'll just avoid the mpcnc entirely.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:39 am
    Permalink

    Well, guess I will never print that mpcnc then, if that's the way the dude wants to be. Why even put it up on open source platforms.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:43 am
    Permalink

    I built the MPCNC a few years ago. It was also difficult to find the right tubes here in Australia and I started using Aluminium tubes as I could get them in the right size, but in the end they weren't strong enough and ended up being distorted by the pressure of the bearings. I found some chrome tube that worked, but the issue I then had was the Y-Axis wasn't moving straight and a square ended up being a parallelogram. I tried to find the issue for weeks but in the end couldn't solve it so I pulled it apart and put it away. I did speak with Ryan a few times on the forums and he was helpful, but yeah kind of glad I didn't continue with the project.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:47 am
    Permalink

    I mean…this convinced me not to go MPCNC…what’s the point of making it 3D printed if you don’t want people to mod it?

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 1:51 am
    Permalink

    that's very hard to hear……

    but u can still update n use for urself right ??

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:02 am
    Permalink

    build a railcore next time lol

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:17 am
    Permalink

    I was considering building one. Knowing what kind of guy is behind this project, I won't.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:26 am
    Permalink

    Hey, what about the less-known RS-CNC? Pretty much the same deal but the guys who created it are french and from a forum, so I believe it to be both metric and drama-free!

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:34 am
    Permalink

    Burn it! Literally do a MPCNC burning video. That would be awesome!

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:39 am
    Permalink

    Wow, that’s disappointing. Time for a mostly metric-and-CNC CNC.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:40 am
    Permalink

    Sorry for the bad day in the legal office. It's never fun to argue over copyrights.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:42 am
    Permalink

    I've been keeping an eye on MPCNC over the last couple of years and was following this series with great interest.
    However, Ryan has now shot himself in the foot.
    I understand why he's trying to protect his design, but this is just silly.
    I wont be building a MPCNC now.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:51 am
    Permalink

    hey tom try the root3 cnc still 3d printed but much stronger i think also love your channel thanks

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 2:56 am
    Permalink

    I would think your part counts as an aftermarket kit.

    I wish he would have understood your position and just let you continue with this project. But what's done is done.

    Can't wait to see what you work on next. :{J

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:09 am
    Permalink

    That's too bad as I enjoyed watching this series but I respect your decision.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:19 am
    Permalink

    Booooooooo! I don’t like the way this ended.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:24 am
    Permalink

    Man I love copyright law killing innovation.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:24 am
    Permalink

    Silly, because the design kinda sucks. Novelty value at best.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:36 am
    Permalink

    By his logic, anything that wraps around a conduit is a derivative of the conduit, because the OD is a functional dimension of the conduit so most of his design is derivative of that.
    Also by his logic, any aftermarket parts for anything are derivative of whatever they attach to, e.g. car parts.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:37 am
    Permalink

    You can make something even better than this, hit me up, Im an engineer, Ill draw and colab.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:37 am
    Permalink

    Hey Tom, why don't you tell everyone how you intended to copy the MPCNC to achieve your goal of making it completely open-source?! Why are you only talking about one little piece? Better yet, why do you refuse to properly answer any of Ryan's comments on your other videos? You probably have an "inspired-by" "design" coming out soon, huh?

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:41 am
    Permalink

    I totally respect the "walk away" decision: Neither support nor attack; just state your case, agree to disagree, then move on.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 3:56 am
    Permalink

    I believe that you took the right approach to the issue. It is a shame that his stance is so harsh, but the response that was given to you is unwarranted. Maybe he looks at it as you trying to one up him on his own project…which is incredibly childish. Not only that but dang man ….just in the sheer premise of basic decency…I didn't even know about this machine until you brought it to my attention….now it's gotten some really bad attention, only due to interactions with someone that spent the time livestreaming the full build.. that just doesn't bode well with me.

    As a maker, I can say that I am ALWAYS looking for a way to improve upon EVERYTHING. To release an idea I to the public and imagine it is the ultimate solution to a problem is quite bigoted. There will always be a better solution for EACH use case. To believe otherwise is simply ignorant.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:09 am
    Permalink

    It's a shame that it has come down to this. Thom, your idea is brilliant, and I was looking forward to finally now being able to customize parts as required – we don't all live in the USA. IF you decide to make your own designed CNC, with printed parts, I am sure there will be a lot of support! Good luck! 🙂

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:20 am
    Permalink

    Sad to see it end this way. Hopefully you build another CNC cause I was learning a lot! Maybe I'll use my MPCNC to cut the plates to make one of the other CNCs on thingiverse…

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:24 am
    Permalink

    Request the ACTUAL REGISTERED copyright. Just SAYING you have a copyright DOES not make it so. Ryan is WRONG. Prior art is NOT ownership. Change the original by 10% is derivative but NOT infringement. Contact a lawyer in your jurisdiction that didn't get their degree from the Internet.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:26 am
    Permalink

    Don't let that experience slow you down. Great job respecting the CC issue. We don't always need lawyers to tell us right and wrong.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:36 am
    Permalink

    Sorry Tom. This is terrible. This project was really exciting and could have been great. Sad to hear the community has such a big road block. Hopefully someone comes up with a new one fully open. Keep us in the loop if they do.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:43 am
    Permalink

    Im gonna use a mpcnc to build a real cnc

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:46 am
    Permalink

    You should look at the Dremel CNC project and modify that. Made by polish guy so its metric. Just mod the holder to fit a larger spindle.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:46 am
    Permalink

    How disappointing. It's too bad that not everyone is for open sourcing. The whole idea of projects like this was supposed to be about accessibility.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 4:57 am
    Permalink

    I dont think this was ment to be an open source project. Where would the upgrades stop? Would I be able to download and print a fully upgraded machine for free? See where I'm going? It's not expensive for the kit so if people dont need him for the print hes out of business. Why dont you just design your own?

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 5:01 am
    Permalink

    It is just another CNC machine with the same X,Y,Z movements. What is there to copyright about!! The best part of the video is the dismantling of the MPCNC. Thanks TOM for your kindness of sharing to the community.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 5:17 am
    Permalink

    I wish you would have pushed this instead of given in. Ryan is a total idiot and a bunch of people lost respect for the mpcnc over this. Makes me wish that a huge undertaking of modified mpcnc part designs would start popping up all over YouTube and thingiverse now. Ryan needs to understand this design really isn’t very special at all.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 5:23 am
    Permalink

    There is nothing wrong with a little competition. How about we all get together as a community and design an open source machine. I am happy to volunteer my time.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 5:27 am
    Permalink

    Why do people have discussions of this kind on twitter instead of privately?

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 5:38 am
    Permalink

    well looks like I wont be buying a lowrider parts kit.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 5:39 am
    Permalink

    I am really disappointed with Ryan's attitude.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 6:05 am
    Permalink

    drops mic

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 6:11 am
    Permalink

    AND just like that v1engineering lost a lot of potential customer buying other components from their shop ( non printed parts )

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 6:12 am
    Permalink

    How could someone abuse an open-source community by utilizing its resources to make something, and then refuse to make it open source? Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Won't be building this machine. Gross.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 6:16 am
    Permalink

    @Thomas please REUSE those parts and move on to the (MOSTLY PRINTED) ROOT 3!!!
    Thank you to the commenters below – I'd not heard of the R3 – it looks like a MUCH more ROBUST and CAPABLE machine. The guy (Pete) has the opposite attitude and is ASKING the community FOR HELP and improvements!

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 6:20 am
    Permalink

    Yet again, copyright and patent law ruins the day. Hooray!

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 6:50 am
    Permalink

    An open-builds machine would be better – more openess to improving and you dont have one person who is "precious" that someone made a part from scratch that looks like his… Maybe this Ryan can share what other shape would fit a round piece of pipe… Triangle? Square?..

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 7:08 am
    Permalink

    Well he is an arse, you building this on your channel tells all your sub's of its existence, it is free advertising, and if you make a part that improves it it is good in the long run, i.e. the basis of the open source 3D printer community improving the printer design for all. I appreciate what you do and the designer needs to get a life, someone in China will copy it and sell it as soon as it makes money, what will he do if you build the Chinese version? Keep up the good work.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 7:17 am
    Permalink

    I gave you a thumbs up just because you spend the time to design a part.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 7:17 am
    Permalink

    The spindle is the issue I see. I searched that spindle and it's crap.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 7:24 am
    Permalink

    That was disappointing. I won’t be building one. That was bad form on his part. I look forward to seeing your expertise in action in the CNC arena. Thank you for time. It is appreciated.

    Reply
  • September 12, 2019 at 7:28 am
    Permalink

    Well done Ryan. You have helped make your project very successful with this step. NOOOONE!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *