The injection mold comment in the Prusa tour video was sarcasm that might‘ve went over some people‘s heads. Prusa being less open source seems completely made up to me. No idea why someone would say that other than making closed source printers like Bambulab‘s look less problematic.

Ultimately it‘s up to you to decide how much you‘re willing to spend and how much you value convenience vs. actually owning your printer and contributing to 3D printing staying open source.

I for one see enough parallels between the new generation of closed source 3D printers and seemingly cheap HP inkjet printers that became increasingly more hostile towards costumers as they gained market share to not touch them with a stick.

I think that perception comes from a post from Josef Prusa where he expressed disdain for companies that are taking the Prusa design and software and wholesale copying it (while doing a really bad job of removing the Prusa branding in the software/firmware). He said that he wasn’t sure how viable continuing to publish everything openly would be given this. I think that was aimed at Anycubic, but don’t quote me on that.

I would say you’re probably going to have a better time with the MK4 in the long run vs. the Bambu Labs, but Prusa should probably take notice that other companies are starting to sell really competitive machines that are reliable (and not just ripoffs of their designs). Sure the XL is unparalleled, but if you just want to unbox a midsize printer and go, Prusa’s machines are very expensive preassembled. Yeah you can get it cheaper if you assemble it yourself, but that doesn’t cover every potential customer’s desires.

I get the sense that Prusa is getting comfortable with his success, and with that he’s getting more protective of his cash cow. Him complaining about how much value he sees in open source is - in my opinion, anyway - a symptom of that. The entire RepRap community upon which he built his business is thanks to open source.

He made a post about some future printers not being fully open source anymore. The post is here: https://blog.prusa3d.com/the-state-of-open-source-in-3d-printing-in-2023_76659/

These are the working points for their future license (not fully fleshed out):

• If you’re using some code or blueprints to bring software or hardware to market, the original code’s authorship must be clearly stated on the product or in the software. Additionally, deleting copyright information from headers and history from repositories is prohibited.
• The production of nearly exact 1:1 clones for commercial purposes is not allowed.
• License for manufacturing spare parts is valid for service, modification, or educational purposes.
• Upgrades and additional modifications based on original parts are allowed and welcome.
• Parts that can be considered consumables (e.g., thermistors, heater blocks, fans, printing plates, etc.) can be manufactured and sold commercially after the verification by the licensor based on the presentation of samples.
• If a product is labeled by the manufacturer as obsolete (or cannot be purchased or ordered for longer than 3 months), the non-commercial clause is automatically terminated if identical parts are no longer produced within the successor of the product or cannot be purchased separately.
• If the licensor ceases its activity, the non-commercial clause is terminated.

These terms are incompatible with open source.