Defcad.com Wants To Be the Google of 3D-Printable Guns

Sparrowvsrevolution writes that at this year's SXSW, Defense Distributed founder Code Wilson has announced a for-profit spinoff of his gun-printing project, from which people will be able to search for and download gun-related CAD files. "Though the search engine will index all types of files, Wilson says he hopes the group's reputation for hosting politically incendiary content will mean users trust that it won't censor search results. 'When we say you should have access to these files, people believe we mean that,' says Wilson. 'No takedowns. No removals. We'd fight everything to the full extent of the law.' Along with the SXSW announcement, Wilson also released a provocative video where he lays out the plan for Defcad.com and criticizes gun control advocates and 'collusive' 3D printing companies like Makerbot."

Comments

My first thought

[Ukab the Great]

is who would name their kid "Code". My second thought is "duh, I'm on Slashdot".

No takedowns. No removals.

[OzPeter]

Hmm .. is history about to repeat itself? I seem to remember there used to be a bunch of mp3 hosting sites that aren't here now. I'm guessing that this guy will be headed to oblivion once people start up-loading 3d scans of copywrited material - whether it is from a gun manufacturer or from Disney.

Good luck finding somewhere safe to host the servers.

Re:Punk

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

"It's a .44 Defcad, the most powerful handgun printed, and it'll blow my hand clean off. So - hey, knock it off with the laughter!"

Interesting intersection of Patent and Copyright

[Erich]

It's usually hard to copyright a "thing". If you make a thing -- a new type of shelving or gun or glass or pen or chair or whatever -- you can't get a copyright on it, you can maybe get a patent on it.

So for a CAD file of a gun, the CAD file could be copyrighted... but it would be copyrighted by the author, not by the manufacturer of the gun it was a clone of (unless they were the author, of course). Now, printing out the gun might be manufacturing something covered by patents... but copying the file wouldn't be creating the gun.

3D printing will sure be interesting from a legal standpoint, it potentially brings copyright and patent law together for just about everything. I would hope that we could establish that CAD files for 3D printers are equal to recipes for the purposes of copyright: a series of steps to create something. But that's certainly not what happened for source code.

Less drama more substance

[h4rr4r]

How about before you become the google of something you prove that this even exists.

Show me a working 3d printed gun. Not a lower for an AR, not a magazine, but an actually working 3d printed gun. That means you have to 3d print the parts that go bang. Otherwise you are just 3d printing gun accessories.

Re:Less drama more substance

[MBGMorden]

By law the lower for an AR IS the gun. Except for the serialed received every other component of a gun is considered parts.. Its the only part that requires a background check, and under most pending legislation will be the only actual part banned from sale to civilians (largely the same for magazines).

Re:Frankly Code, no one gives a damn.

[Sarten-X]

It's not the government that is out to get you, the freedom-loving individual. It's the other freedom-loving individuals, whose freedom and yours have come into conflict. They're the ones who will fight you, and they're the ones who will use the government as a weapon in that fight.

The government is indeed a brutal tool, but it's a double-edged sword, that will decide for itself who will be struck. That decision is based on the opinions of judges throughout history, who have made decisions on the subjective evidence of whose freedom must be suppressed to bring about the most benefit for society.

To sway those judges to your favor, promise and demonstrate a benefit to society and respect for the freedom and happiness of others. To turn those judges against you, promise to incite mayhem and subvert government authority, and give others the tools and encouragement to do so.

Re:NRA: free speech champs

[MBGMorden]

Copyrighted designs aren't really much of a thing in the gun industry. As a matter of fact tons of clones and copies are made of various designs.

The Mauser bolt action is cloned by countless companies.
The AR15 design is cloned by at least a few dozen different companies.
The Colt 1911 design is cloned by Kimber, Rock Island, STI, SVI, Ruger, Remington, S&W, Springfield, Taurus, and about a bazillion more.
The Beretta 92 design is cloned by both Taurus and Turkey
The Walther P99 is cloned by Canik.
The CZ-75 design is cloned by Tanfoglio and Canik.
The Glock is cloned by Timberwolf
The Ruger 10/22 is cloned by Volquartsen

And so forth for many, many models. Gun technology in use today has been nearly perfected for close to 100 years. It truly is more about just making a quality product than the "IP" so many other industries worry about.

Re:NRA: free speech champs

[ducman]

The NRA doesn't represent the gun manufacturers. It's an association of dues-paying individual members.

Re:Frankly Code, no one gives a damn.

[CanHasDIY]

It's not the government that is out to get you, the freedom-loving individual. It's the other freedom-loving individuals, whose freedom and yours have come into conflict. They're the ones who will fight you, and they're the ones who will use the government as a weapon in that fight.

If you're of the persuasion that you have a right to force others (or have the government force others on your behalf) to give up their freedoms so you can have some warm, fuzzy feeling, you do not fit the description of "freedom-loving individual."