Cultures of sharing in 3D printing: What can we learn from the licence choices of Thingiverse users?

This article contributes to the discussion by analysing how users of the leading online 3D printing design repository Thingiverse manage their intellectual property (IP). 3D printing represents a fruitful case study for exploring the relationship between IP norms and practitioner culture. Although additive manufacturing technology has existed for decades, 3D printing is on the cusp of a breakout into the technological mainstream – hardware prices are falling; designs are circulating widely; consumer-friendly platforms are multiplying; and technological literacy is rising. Analysing metadata from more than 68,000 Thingiverse design files collected from the site, we examine the licensing choices made by users and explore the way this shapes the sharing practices of the site’s users. We also consider how these choices and practices connect with wider attitudes towards sharing and intellectual property in 3D printing communities. A particular focus of the article is how Thingiverse structures its regulatory framework to avoid IP liability, and the extent to which this may have a bearing on users’ conduct. The paper has three sections. First, we will offer a description of Thingiverse and how it operates in the 3D printing ecosystem, noting the legal issues that have arisen regarding Thingiverse’s Terms of Use and its allocation of intellectual property rights. Different types of Thingiverse licences will be detailed and explained. Second, the empirical metadata we have collected from Thingiverse will be presented, including the methods used to obtain this information. Third, we will present findings from this data on licence choice and the public availability of user designs. Fourth, we will look at the implications of these findings and our conclusions regarding the particular kind of sharing ethic that is present in Thingiverse; we also consider the “closed” aspects of this community and what this means for current debates about “open” innovation.

Sport scandal and sponsorship decisions: Team identification matters

We conducted an experiment to investigate the impact of sport scandal on consumer attitudes toward a range of sport stakeholders. We examined the effects of fans’ social identity (fan of scandalized team vs. fan of rival team), scandal severity (single perpetrator vs. multiple perpetrators) and the sponsor brand’s response to the scandal (sponsorship retention vs. termination) on consumers’ attitudes toward the implicated team, the scandal perpetrators, the sport, and sponsor brand. We find evidence of differential reactions to scandal reflecting social identity, such that fans support their own team despite increased scandal severity but negatively judge a rival team’s transgressions. Results suggest that where fans are concerned, sponsors may be better served to continue with a sponsorship following scandal than to terminate, even for some forms of severe scandal. However, termination may receive more positive evaluation from rival team fans; hence continuation of sponsorship needs to accompany a tempered approach.

Should we extend 'Care' or 'care'?

A discursive article examining the proposition that provisions for young people in care should be formally extended beyond their 18th birthday when care normally ends. Debate exists as to whether this should include a legislative extension to Care as has happened in some overseas jurisdictions or whether it is more appropriate to simply extend access to dedicated support provisions. The article concludes that both may have a place as long as the complexity of young people's situations is adequately responded to.

Unraveling the “passion orchestra” in academia

This paper disentangles how organization members' “passion orchestra” is related to their entrepreneurial intentions in the particularly relevant context of academia. Drawing on passion literature and identity theory, we propose and test a model linking two central parts of researchers' “passion orchestra”, namely entrepreneurial and obsessive scientific passion, directly and indirectly, to spin-off and start-up intentions. While spin-off intentions refer to intentions to found a firm based upon research results, start-up intentions denote intentions to start any type of company. Using a sample of 2308 researchers from 24 European universities, our findings reveal that higher levels of entrepreneurial passion are associated with both stronger spin-off and start-up intentions. Further, obsessive scientific passion is positively associated with researchers' intentions to create a spin-off, and negatively with their propensity to establish a start-up. Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and affective organizational commitment mediate these effects. Finally, the two types of passion show characteristic interactions. Obsessive scientific passion moderates the entrepreneurial passion–intentions relationship such that it strengthens spin-off intentions. Our results highlight that recasting the individual driven by a singular passion to one with a “passion orchestra” provides a more holistic understanding of the new venture creation process. Implications for research and practice are discussed.