The unique properties of every imaging/printing system are usually robust in identifying specific devices. Not really anonymous if eventually registered, compared, or metadata indexed.

It is also common for people to create urban legends rather than discuss how to actually fix legal policy failures. As previously stated, consumers implicitly gave permission though sustained inaction on industry volunteering to help track customers.

An OSS printer would be cool from a standards/driver perspective, but microfluidics are a nontrivial technology. Bloomberg also paid lobbyists >$23m to try to mandate "AI" R.A.T. installation (company associated with Palantir) on 3D printers to attempt convincing criminals to care about laws again.

It is unclear if such action is consistent with constitutional legal precedents, but it is certainly hilarious to see kids figure out the mess a prior generation creates. Best of luck, =3