Design, residuals and the long tail

"If you are not an IP lawyer, please send this post to someone who is. Or you might want to just pitch this idea to them. If you are at all interested in personal fabrication, 3D printing, mass customization etc. it is crucial that such a business be created. If you can, please try to motivate someone you know to start it.

After all as Warhol said, "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes." And everyone won't all be able to make their way to the offices of Fancy, Fancier & Fancy-est esq. on Park Avenue".

So writes Joris Peels on his Shapeways blog, in an impassioned post entitled "The democratization of manufacturing, design residuals and IP". Joris argues for the creation of business models for, among other things, design-based creativity based on the fact of the 'long tail' that follows the exploitation of new designs and the means of extracting income from it. The big problem, of course, is "how?" Joris states:

"Some product designers are also increasingly getting into the royalty game charging between 3-5% on future revenues from their designs".

It would be good to know who they are, how they do it and what happens when the long tail meets the law of diminishing returns: the smaller and more obscure an infringement is, the less cost-effective is its enforcement, particularly where any damages award might reflect the design owner's expectation of receiving a royalty of just 3-5%. Readers' comments are welcome.