laser -> "special" resin required. Formlabs recently moved on to LCDs meaning in the years to come the last third-party manufacturers will stop producing those resins as demand further declines. Leaving the first-party FormLabs as the only option ($100+/kg).
Difficult to maintain resin tank. Requires a vacuum oven and an upfront investment of roughly $150 for chemicals. There are conversion kits/prints for FEP film to resolve this limitation.
The teeth is indeed a critical aspect. It has to be symmetrical as this assembly is mirrored to block the rotation in the other direction.
An alternative to this would be printing the spring with the contact surface separately and inserting it into this print (pause at layer height, insert part, continue print) allowing other geometries (that would overlap with the teeth if printed in place) and pretension. The downside is it's a manual task and one more separate part to keep track of.
This is small and the tolerances of the center hub cause the teeths/"gear" to move approx. 0.3-0.5mm of centre. This means what you see in the CAD/slicer isn't how it will look once printed. I had to narrow the gap down as much as I could to get the largest contact area. If you make it a sled on one side there is less material/surface area.
A further consequence is that the tip of it doesn't touch anything as such you could remove the very tip to adjust the sound signature. The feeling is slightly changed but primarily this replaced the high-pitched plastic sound with a deep tone.
The nice aspect is that in the blocking position, it is a solid connection meaning it can take as much load as the teeth (tip) can support (hence the trying to maximize the contact area there). The spring element is only there to return this blocking "bolt" into position after a teeth passes through.
I think you still somehow assume this is some kind of ad to sell this design for money or I am a jerk for not just publishing it with source files.
Also not everybody spends their time designing and publishing whatever is popular at the moment on Makerworld to collect points/store credit. There is a different world that doesn't run on Fusion360 source file most people could edit and can design parts with a particular material & print(farm)/process in mind to get the most out of the FFF 3D-printing process.
v10 should still be 0.4mm tolerances (easy to print) on all sides and working. Otherwise not a great design but enough for you to understand that there are dozens of parameters to tune in such a "simple" mechanism and it is (nearly) impossible to nail it on the first try. Have we started talking about optimizing the force required to break it loose? That's one more thing that needs to be accounted for.
If you consider sharing mechanical design concepts as not in line with the spirit it's fine but others are likely interested in seeing how things work and takes it as inspiration for their designs.
Go and recreate it. Nobody stops you. Could provide the STL but wouldn't be worth a lot as this is so dialed (tolerances) that it comes down to the specific printer/extrusion system. There are older revisions with huge tolerances (0.4mm) that work but wear down rapidly. To print this exact version it needs to be capable of printing with 0.23mm gap/tolerance between parts.
Printing fast/without cooling can also go the other way:
By printing very fast the last layer may still be "hot" when the new layer is added. As the temperature differential is smaller there is less stress within the part once it is cooled down.
Regardless of the scanner use matting spray. Either a commercial that evaporates or baby powder + IPA or baking powder.
OpenScan was already meantioned by somebody else.
The CR scan otter won't work for small parts and the CR-scan software isn't great for example there isn't an undo button to remove the last x seconds of bad scan data.
OpenScan is a opensource project for smaller objects. With the PS5 maybe a Creality CR-Scan but it's quality will be borderline unusable for a shape like a PS5 panel. So after all the entry scanner for a job like this could be a Shining Einstar.
Good news: If you own an iPhone try it's lidar first. Creality CR-Scan is only slightly better than iPhones. With Android phone, you could try photogrammetry but to scan the PS5 part you would need matting spray and even more tracker (small dots glued to the surface).
Btw. Somebody somewhere at some point in time already scanned or modeled the PS5 side panel. As starting point check GrabCAD and thingiverse for a 3D-model.
BambuLab wants to be the Apple of 3D-printing. So they simplified and decided the factory bed level with auto bed leveling/compensation is good enough for the user.
On high end printers there is just no need to level them. The factory does it and the bed won't move at all due to the excellent mechanical designs.
Everything else? They have it to level the corners of the bed and use automatic bed leveling/correction to get it perfect and adjust for build plate imperfections.
There is one system that does level the bed but doesn't need the knobs as each of the three mounting points is connected to an independent z-axis (kinematic bed): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgkK7Fez8VU
I do care and that's why at 400€ I would go with them but with 320€ vs. 520€ you have to put a lot of emphasis on this point.
As compromise to split it between Prusa and BambuLab isn't feasible either. You want a standardized setup to keep it simple. Meaning all Prusa or all BambuLab.