this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2026
349 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

81208 readers
3849 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/47449079

I stumbled across this link in the comment of another post, and thought it was super promising!

Someone mentioned something about in the US, this would be illegal due to DRM laws - not sure about the specifics of this, but regardless an open source printer seems like something we've needed for ages, as printers are something that always seem like way more of a headache then they need to be. It seems like such a simple technology that has existed for quite some time, but they are always such a pain to deal with. (Maybe it's just my bad luck with printers?)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] timestatic@feddit.org 49 points 1 day ago (3 children)

FYI its not actually open source. Its a cool idea but you can't actually sell it or sell derivatives of it. Even at zero-sum. This hinders any actual forks from being successful, as any intention to sell the product (even without aiming for profits) is forbidden by their license. It just allows for tinkerers as contributors without properly allowing forks. Makes me a bit sad tbh, because its so close to being awesome.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 hours ago

I saw a maker the other day that released his plans on his project with a non-commercial license. He later found it was being sold on Amazon. He contacted an attorney friend of his, the attorneys said that the maker licensees are only truly effective on art.

If it's a physical functional product, you have very little in the way of legal protection from a creative common license, which kind of sucks because the proper legal method would then be patent, but that puts us in the same scenario that you can't copy it for a non-profit.

[–] pokexpert30@jlai.lu 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ah yes, the classic "if you can't build it yourself you don't deserve it". Very cool, surely people will not go for an older laser printer instead.

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 2 points 15 hours ago

No they sell it, but only the founders themselves. So better than a modern DRM HP Printer but still, not really FOSS sadly. I hope they change their mind on the license

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago

Well that's disappointing.