....

[Just_a_fan]

How do you patent something that is already in the public domain?

[Zynerji]

....

[PhillipM]

If it could make someone a trillion dollar business then someone would already be doing it. There are a literally hundreds of CNC manufacturers making various types of 3D printers and patents already, the guys that already supply the F1 teams with theirs. If they have to purchase them already, what makes you think they have the capability to design and make them now?

[Zynerji]

....

[PhillipM]

I did, and it's nothing like what you say there - it still only prints the single material it's running - it's just a way of directing the material flow for solidification, we already have ultra-rapid 3d printing techniques such as the Carbon liquid machines, etc. This just allows the speed at even smaller scales and higher speeds. It's still **nothing** to do with F1 teams core tech's and as I said, if it was commercially viable, there'd be 100 firms doing it already.

[Zynerji]

....

[Just_a_fan]

How do you patent something that is already in the public domain?

The machines to accomplish a task are patentable. This is a proof-of-concept. I believe that The Group could engineer a novel design, and patent it. Then license it to auto manufacturers and such as complete units.

Haas didn't invent CNC, but their designs are patented. Why would this be different?

Maybe there's a difference between jurisdictions.

[Zynerji]

....

[PhillipM]

PS: maybe im partial to this, as ive been working on my own version for 6 years now, and can already see the changes needed to get it further...

Maybe I'm partial to it as I use several types of printers for exactly the same things as F1 teams - prototyping car parts.

As for when the paper was release - not really relevant, the vast majority of research in this field is already sponsored and backed by manufacturers through firms, universities, grants, etc, and they generally will have liaisons with the teams all through the research to see how the results are going and to negotiate on successful research for patent rights, etc.
Hell, there's 2 printing research labs near me and they have rolls royce, mclaren, TWI, Boeing, etc, reps in all day long working with them on commercialising lab results/work.

[Just_a_fan]

Look at cars. They all use the same core concepts (steerable energy, 4 tires, enclosed seating) but each manufacturer holds 100,000 patents on how they chose to implement the concept.

But there aren't 100,000 patents for cars, are there? There are lots of patents for component parts, sure, but no one suddenly wakes up on Monday and says "I think I'll patent a 4-wheeled box used for carrying people from A to B" because it's an idea that's already in the public domain.

In the UK, at least, a patent only gets granted when:

To be granted a patent, your invention must be all of the following:

something that can be made or used
new
inventive - not just a simple modification to something that already exists

So as this idea has already been made public and was an idea created by others, you couldn't get a patent for it in the UK. Maybe in the US, for example, other rules apply and an adaptation of the published idea can be patented. As I said, maybe there are legislative differences.

[Jolle]

and why would a company like Daimler invest in something only so FiatChrysler and Renault could make cheaper cars? Companies like that have enough resources to do their own R&D (and probably are looking in multiple ways to add stuff like this to their production portfolio)

[Zynerji]

....

[Zynerji]

....

[Just_a_fan]

and why would a company like Daimler invest in something only so FiatChrysler and Renault could make cheaper cars? Companies like that have enough resources to do their own R&D (and probably are looking in multiple ways to add stuff like this to their production portfolio)

Think about what happens to profit margins when everyone's cost of production plummets.

That's why.

The profit margins would realign to a similar level as the price of the item drops. If it can be made cheaper, someone will sell it cheaper and then you either drop your price or lose market share.

[joshuagore]

Race teams do what they do, very well. It is concise and focused and informed by specific goals, one of which is not necessarily profitability outside the marketing wings which they are. Don't people on this same forum claim the R&D done by the teams doesn't even filter into production vehicles(not everyone but some people, and I'm not saying it doesn't just saying skepticism already exists about f1's ability to implement practical innovation in the mass market)? Think about what we are proposing here, giving skunkworks development branches of marketing departments the goal of figuring out new ways to not only make faster race cars but make everything. It seems completely out of touch with the means of production and how technology actually reaches profitability i.e. actual labor saving. I would never in a million years task a f1 team with figuring out the worlds next labor saving device. This reads like F1 erotic fan fiction. Great fantasy, but not anywhere near reality.

Keep in mind most technology which makes F1 is what it is today, was built by consumer markets like aircraft, or are the result of defense supported by human desires for security. So now you want that R&D to be instead shifted to the marketing budgets of a few automakers. I just can't compute.