Are you completely against patents, or just against some?
The people who produced this have obviously spent a significant amount of time working out how to make this possible. I haven't seen their patents, but I doubt they're as generic as "A device which extrudes plastic in 3D space". Have you read the patents they've submitted and actually found prior art for the exact aspects of the design they've patented?
Patents are designed for this kind of thing. They allow these guys to sell the results of their work without getting ripped off straight away by someone who spent none of the money doing R&D and so just has to cover their costs.
I am a reprap core developer and I've seen this exact thing a number of times. There is documented prior art from 2010. Someone I know has had that device on their desk for the past year. There is no part of it that is innovative. They do not deserve a patent. By applying for a patent, they destroy their credibility in the field. Which is all extremely sad and stupid because it's a cool product and they've thought of very creative stuff to make with it. They are wasting effort and money on patenting this stuff when they could just execute better than everyone else and have the market for what is clearly a fad to themselves. The more money they waste on crap like that, the less likely they are to deliver in time.
On that note, hell yeah I am completely against patents. Patents are the biggest threat to open hardware, and open hardware is my life.
Clearly this 3D printing pen is innovative, but that does not necessarily imply that it includes patentable inventions. The technology used looks like FDM (fused deposition modeling) 3D printing extended to free hand, without support material.
The key technology here that makes this 3D/air printing possible is the gooey material that the pen releases. If this material has properties that other existing materials do not have, then it may be patentable. Also if the pen releases material in a manner that is new and novel, then it too may be patentable.
I more or less did this 2 weeks ago while testing the extruder for my 3d printer (and I'm no pioneer here). I used Kliment's (parent of thread) software to cause filament to extrude from my 3d printer's nozzle (the hot end) while I tried to write letters to test it was working ok.
Now someone is trying to claim this "new technology" is patentable.
The spatial integrity of the structure could be enhanced, perhaps, by using a ferromagnetic "ink" inside a structure that moves and varies the strengths of magnets to keep the material at the tip of the pen at its centre.
It's trivial to create a "magnetic well" with three to four strong magnets balancing against each other at a fixed point, with gravity holding a ferromagnetic object against it. Altering their directions and strengths would allow that single-point "well" to move just behind the pen. If the hardened material could withstand the force one would be able to prevent the drooping witnessed in the video. I'm not sure how one would maintain multiple wells simultaneously from a single plane. That or move the pen slower. Clearly, magnets win.
I want to see someone use this to print out a 3d structure in the same way a 3d printer does. Not that it would be efficient or sane, but it would look really cool to see the infill and what not.
Reminds me a bit of working with hot glue guns, only quicker drying. I still remember the first time I got hot glue on my hand while making a project in elementary school.
Good! But that's not "3D printing" or even printing at all! ;)
Maybe you could have a 3D model and a robot could draw the "sculpture". Anyway, we want MORE !
Just came to say this. I'm glad that there are some people who know the Chinese sugar art.
The video you linked is not very clear. Some suggestions YouTube gives have a better perspective, for example this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQlQQDP6hNY
It would be such an awesome thing if they weren't trying to take it away from the rest of the world.