Example for Grade 11: Argumentative – 3D Printers - ID: 4299

for this response.

3D Printers

  • Purpose: Argumentative
  • Grade: 11
  • ID No. 4299

Student Response

Scoring & Annotations

Dear Head Librarian,

The idea of the 3-D printer has been around for many years. Scientists and engineers have been working around the idea of a device that could make virtually anything for years. Until recently, that has only seemed like a Sci-Fi movie prop. Now it is a real life object on sale to anyone willing to pay. Although the library is a great place to learn about technology, there is no need for ours to have a 3-D printer. It is not what the library is supposed to be based around.

The library is supposed to be a place of learning and fun. It is a place to join a world of beautiful yet intangible places and objects through words. The library has been a quiet, knowledgeable place for centuries. Throughout the years, we have added things likes toys, crafts, and games to keep the little ones quiet. Libraries have also added computers and Dvds for the sake of keeping up with the times, but that does not mean they have to be completely high tech. A 3-D printer is simply too much. As stated by “Mission Creep- A 3D Printer Will Not Save Your Library” by Hugh Rundle, “Tying your library to something like a 3D printrer moves you in the wrong direction. It leads you to the tangible- that’s not your job”.

Although one component of the library is too offer computer service to the public because it is not always available at their home, this does not make providing expensive services our job. Do we provide meals three times a day? Do we provide fresh clothes to the public everyday? This is exactly the same. In some ways,a 3D printer can seem necessary, but in reality, it has no place in a library. We are not a manufacturing company, or a Wal-Mart. A library is a place of learning not printing out simple things that will not benefit people intellectually.

On top of the 3-D printer being against what libraries have believed in, it is also going to be a huge legal issue. With skills such as photoshop and reproduction, how could we one hundred percent know what is legal to print and what is not? I understand that through technicalities and exceptions, many people who try to copy things will be excused, but that does not disclude us. By not being able to tell, what is legal and what is not, we could end up in serious trouble as well. The point of adding things to our library is to attract people willing to learn something new or even just read a little for fun. It is not to discourage people by “illegal copying” and “ripping off” creators and inventors. In turn, many people could end up being sued because of not close enough monitoring. In the third article, it states that the punishment for breaking said copyrights: “The law allows rights holders to assume- without the burden of actually proving harm- damages of up to $150,000 for willful acts of infringement”. It would not good for our library to be fined to much just because some one did not look into what they were printing and copied someone else’s work.

Finally, by getting a 3-D printer, we would be discouraging what we have encouraged for years. By getting this printer we would be stomping all over people’s motivation to actually want to create something. Instead of actually trying to figure things out and want to make something work for the better, a person could just walk right into here and pay us a cheap amount of money to print something that’s already been done. Why even bother making a tree out of clay, when you can print out a Michel Angelo sculpture for only dollars? In “3D Printing Fits Withing the Existing Online Copyright System”, a man named Schwanitz had “created” an amazing optical illusion. He named it the “Penrose Triangle” and posted it online hoping to make some money off of it. He claimed it “He also, for the better or worse, both claimed that creating this design was a massive design achievement and refused to tell anyone else how he made the object”. Shortly after, a man took Schwanitz design and made his very own. Schwanitz was very upset and claimed that it was his design that had been stolen. The website took the picture down but now wonders if his work is even original. The have been similar and even some exact designs before his of the same things. Getting this printer would just encourage people to steal claim other things that are not truly theirs. The library is supposed to inspire people to thing cleverly and create original things often. The 3-D printer just takes away from that, and gives mean spirited people another excuse to come in and put a stop to creative people. Would you still want to create your art if you knew people were illegally recreating/ claiming what you have done?

To conclude, the 3-D printer is virtually useless to our library. It will stifle creativity, give a bad reputation to the library, and point us into the wrong direction for the future. With this printer we would waste money and time. We would convince people that tangible things are what matter. That is not what we are about. I hope we can see eye to eye on things and you will understand how pointless this printer would truly be in our building.