Slashdot Mirror
After Court Order, 3D-Printed Gun Pioneer Now Sells Pay-What-You-Want CAD Files (arstechnica.com)
CaptainDork writes: In a surprising announcement, Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson announced Tuesday that while he would continue to comply with a federal court order forbidding him from internationally publishing CAD files of firearms, he would also begin selling copies of his 3D-printed gun files for a "suggested price" of $10 each. The files, crucially, will be transmitted to customers "on a DD-branded flash drive" in the United States and won't be available as downloads.
Trying to hide knowledge never protected anyone from anything.
;)
Just my 2 cents
Now maybe he'll be able to pay his lawyers.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
... because he's gonna monetize the thing come hell or high water.
The next step, if any, will be for the Feds and/or states to address the legality of shipping firearms without a license.
I know that doesn't make any sense, but neither did, "Cody is violating firearm export ..."
I agree with an article I read that essentially said the the whole fiasco is stupid because people can buy stolen OEM guns off the street for $20-$100 vs buying all the shit needed for 3D printing.
--
ON ANOTHER NOTE
If this guy (or anyone, for that matter) provides 3D printing code for an existing firearm design, how does square with patents and stuff?
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
What a Patriot. I'll bet he going to be protecting our freedoms real soon now.
Actually, he pretty-much is.
You don't see that because you're on the other side of the issue, on the side of speech you don't like.
We often say that freedom of speech means freedom for others to say things we don't like.
You don't like it, I get that.
Do you believe in free speech or do you believe in suppression of speech?
I want the Barbara Streisand Edition Drive.
well with an cdn network it can be local in each state
...to torrenting this.
What a Patriot. I'll bet he going to be protecting our freedoms real soon now.
When have you ever stood up for principle, even if it meant you were putting yourself at risk ?
You never have.
As such, you are unqualified to judge a man who has stood up for principle. Your existence makes me want to puke. I live in a college town
which is full of jerkoffs like you. The world would be better off if they were all consumed by a sinkhole.
When have you? When are you gun nuts going to start "protecting our freedoms" from an oppressive government? I'm sure real soon now.
Actually, he pretty-much is.
You don't see that because you're on the other side of the issue, on the side of speech you don't like.
We often say that freedom of speech means freedom for others to say things we don't like.
You don't like it, I get that.
Do you believe in free speech or do you believe in suppression of speech?
I believe in Freedom of Speech, and I believe in freedom of knowledge and information.
I also believe that I should be able to walk down the street, or board an aircraft, safe in the knowledge that there are no guns around me.
You can yell FIRE!!! in a crowded theater if you want to, but there should be serious repercussions if you do it for your own amusement.
While it's pretty difficult to control the files people e-mail or torrent each other, it's a hell of a lot easier for the government to clamp down on the ownership of 3D printers.
Free speech, in this case, will kill innovation. Buy your 3D printer now, before there's a law against their personal ownership.
I will never make a weapon, or a part of a weapon, with mine.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
You'd think a simple disclaimer would solve that problem. Sounds like standard practice for gun manufacturing CAD models and blueprints.
Everyone should have access to chemical/biological/nuclear weapons tech
We already do. Check out your local college library.
In this case, the 2nd Amendment is being stretched well beyond its original intent
Quite the opposite. The intent was to allow citizens to own military hardware. Remember the first US Navy ships were privately owned, cannons and all.
the supporters ... we still have law and order to maintain ... Nobody is being realistically oppressed ... ridiculous an argument
Leave tribalism to baboons. Humans have moved on and the wise among us have decided certain rights are necessary to retain every other right.
... it only acknowledges them. This is an important distinction in the US. So the government doesn't grant us rights to make weapons for self-protection, we have that right already. The government doesn't give us the right to speech, we have it already. The Bill of Rights is there to make sure the government doesn't trample on those rights.
For many years I chose not to sell these files, because I’m an open source activist. I believed in demonstrating there’s a right to put this in the public domain."
I support Cody because I support open source advocates.
Just imagine if the idiot federal judge placed a broad ban on Linux prohibiting international distribution because it contains cryptography, which is classified as munitions and thus subject to restrictive national security laws barring exports to enemy countries like Iran or Cuba. As long as websites in the US take steps to block IP's from blacklisted countries and prevent downloading of cryptographic containing software, they're free to distribute open source software as much as they please. The judge could have also ordered this for DD, but chose instead to ignore the law in favor of unsupported speculation about the dire consequences of distributing information. It's un-American.
Congrats, 1100 ad naseum, youv'e gone from biting sarcasm to name-calling troll in the span of a few posts.
Feel better now? Will you rest better knowing you're not even worth the mod points to mod down?
We get it, you hate this, you intensely hate it, this gun thing, and to see someone so blatantly side-step ridiculous laws and inescapable Streisand-effect really, but really gets your goat.
But you know what? Keep at it like that, you'll only die of ulcers.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
I don't hate it. I just think you guys are stupid for focusing on your gun toys and ignoring real issues. Guns aren't the problem: stupidity is.
https://www.cnn.com/2013/02/03...
Ex-Navy sniper, another military vet killed at Texas gun range
maybe memories are short.
As I posted above, I'm still waiting for the gun nuts to actually do anything but talk.
I got a license to carry for three reasons:
1.) I'm a wildlife photographer with expensive equipment.
2.) I'm progressing into the elderly demographic.
3.) Other people got guns.
My biggest concern is 3.).
I keep training, but if I ever have to use my weapon, I'll be calling Momma and peeing down both legs.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Censorious trope three.
I don't need to go back to civics class, I studied constitutional law, passed the bar, and everything. You, on the other hand... not so much.
3) is why I bought a tank. The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a tank.
Stupid gun people are 2 problems in 1, by that math. Exactly right.
And the right for well-organized militias to keep and bear muskets certainly does not directly translate into the right to manufacture personal firearms...
Nobody is "manufacturing" firearms. Someone merely wants to distribute information on how to make a firearm.
Just sell DD branded flash drives -- that just happen to have sample CAD files pre-loaded on them.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I know that you know that the files exist all over the planet.
Any future files will be propagated instantly as well, even (or especially) if Cody's site is paywalled.
There's your CDN.
I had to look that up.
I dismissed the Canadian Dairy Network.
I'm not comfortable that any special topology is necessary for 3D print files.
The goal [of CDN] is to distribute service spatially relative to end-users to provide high availability and high performance .
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Good place to hide and it's bullet-proof.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
You can't stop computer files on the internet. And the CNC and 3d printers are going ot be everywhere... cheaper every year and better every year.
It is game over for the old gun control regime.
It isn't going to just break down in the US... it is going to break down in France... England... Japan... China... everywhere.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
You cite no law. You consider yourself a lawyer yet don't know the law? Lol, there's no legal precedent that says you can manufacture weapons without restrictions, sorry. Go back to civics class, become a real lawyer.*
*(Not just a slashdot bullshitter/moron pretending to know something as you are quite obviously here. All rights are limited, thanks for playing.)
If some lackwit wants to make a plastic zip gun and blow his hand off with it, that's his business. He's no threat to me.
You cite no law! You consider yourself a lawyer yet don't know the law? Lol, there's no precedent that says you can manufacture weapons without restrictions, sorry. Go back to civics class, become a real lawyer.*
*(Not just a slashdot bullshitter/moron pretending to know something as you are quite obviously here. All rights are limited, thanks for playing)
I kinda want applaud this, because it will only make the powers that be want to crack down on the distribution of any DIY firearms.
Also, It's kinda hilarious. Plastic 3d-printed guns that you can only get maybe 1-2 shots off before they're destroyed. You only need one bullet to kill one person, so 3d-printed sniper firearms is likely what people who have the means to print weapons will aim for. Not plastic handguns.
Is this what the leftist idiots have been programmed to parrot now? "Restrictions on rights"? What would you call if if we threw you in a cell without any due process and claimed that we weren't violating your rights, we were just "enforcing reasonable restrictions on your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in order to ensure the safe spaces of others"?
The link includes plenty of law. It is you who cites no law, and also persists in attempting to alter my argument from the legality of publishing information on how to manfucture firearms to one of "manufacturing weapons without restrictions."
The link includes plenty of law. You cite no law, and also persist in attempting to alter my argument from the legality of publishing information on how to manfucture firearms to one of "manufacturing weapons without restrictions."
Plastic 3d-printed guns that you can only get maybe 1-2 shots off before they're destroyed. You only need one bullet to kill one person, so 3d-printed sniper firearms is likely what people who have the means to print weapons will aim for. Not plastic handguns.
Highly unlikely. High powered rifle rounds produce substantially more pressure than handgun rounds. We don't have commercial technology that can safely handle those pressures with plastic, a homebrew solution that can isn't likely in our lifetime.
Like the old Liberator pistols from WWII, they're intended to relieve an occupying soldier of his commercially manufactures weapon.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Where is the CAD file to 3D print yourself some bullets? A gun isn't anything without bullets to fire. This seems important, no?
It still doesn't change the fact that civilian ownership of actual weapons of war. Recall that once upon a time the federal government handed out letters of marque and reprisal... and it wasnt those that authorized outfitting a ship full of cannons.
Yes, we have police and military... the underlying laws however haven't changed. Dont like it? Win some elections, to paraphrase Obama.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
YOU cite no law and it doesn't answer the question, where is the right to manufacture firearms supported directly by Constitutional law outside of the 10th Amendment? You spam a link but lie about being a lawyer?
There are so many actual, real threats that we face in our country. Plastic zip guns are not one of them. We don't need to worry about banning them. People who make them will blow off their own fingers and realize it was a bad idea. Nobody else will care.
You're no lawyer either obviously lol. You spam one link like it answered the question when it clearly does not. You can't cite applicable law, you're an actor.
It's VERY clear you're no lawyer, just a liar. Lawyers actually know the law, you don't. Lawyers actually cite law, you can't. Even your acting is half-assed. What kind of law did you say you practice, lol? Bullshit.
You cite no law and spam a single link that doesn't answer the question. It's painfully obvious you're no lawyer lol. Just another gun nut pretend-hero of the Breitbart law firm, lol. Work on your acting skills.
Ok, you mean the opinion of the judge in the case as he issued the preliminary injunction:
"Regulation under the AECA means that the files cannot be uploaded to the internet, but they can be emailed, mailed, securely transmitted, or otherwise published within the United States."
Yep, read through to that part too.
If you're going to troll, at least read the article you're trolling about. It's not very long, you actually have a chance at finishing it before your attention span falters.
Your task: find in the 2nd amendment where it mentions muskets.
You might even be surprised to know that private citizens owned ships armed with cannons, the most powerful weaponry available at that time.
They retain the rights to your fat ass either way, you would know that if you were actually a lawyer. It's painfully obvious you've run your entire "law firm" from that single link you spam, lol. The Breitbart Law firm?
If you can tapdance you can be in the chorus line, but your acting sucks. You know zero law lol. Spam your single link again, why not. Prove me right once more.
YOU cite no law and it doesn't answer the question, where is the right to manufacture firearms supported directly by Constitutional law outside of the 10th Amendment? You're a liar - but not a lawyer, obviously.
Yeah the plastic 3d printer gun plans are just a distraction mostly for people with irrational fears and little knowledge of guns. The gun parts schematics for receivers and the precedents are more interesting. That a AR is defined by the lower unit and everything else is considered a gun accessory and thus production and distribution is not regulated in the US; this leaves the possibility of lowering the bar for a reliable high rate of fire ghost gun may soon be down to a design where you can pickup a few unregulated parts, print a receiver (that probably doesn't look at all like a weapon) at the local libraries 3d printer and snap together a legal near military grade weapon in a afternoon (and perhaps even allow a auto fire modification, that is mostly illegal today, with no tools.)
As a lower receiver that holds together a metal barrel and firing pin, etc; theoretically would have no requirement to be stronger than what a 3d printer is capable of printing in plastic.
Preliminary injunction page 25: "Regulation under the AECA means that the files cannot be uploaded to the internet, but they can be emailed, mailed, securely transmitted, or otherwise published within the United States."
Oops, a different link that proves you wrong. Oh well, I can live with it.
Keep trying to keep Trump out of prison with your Breitbart "lawyer" buddy lol, faggot.
The files, crucially, will be transmitted to customers "on a DD-branded flash drive"
Woot, infinite free flash drives!
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
You are quite obviously not a lawyer, you know nothing about this. Your spamming of non-legal links just cements it, your acting sucks.
You don't know any actual law because you're not actually a lawyer. You post a link and pretend to be one on slashdot but nobody is fooled lol. Your name proves you're a fakedick too. Just like Archie Bunker, lol.
The same fakedick, probably.
Fake lawyer trots off to dreamland to pretend to be something more interesting. Bye now, fakedick esquire. "Khan academy says I'm a judge now, I pasted a few links yadda yadda..."
Relevant law is not summed in that court order, you're too badly faking being a lawyer by spamming a couple links to old public legal forum lounges, lol fake lawyer. Off to bed with you.
Tomorrow you can pretend to be a cop, officer fakedick the former lawyer who makes his own plastic guns like an idiot, lol.
Better hope a real cop doesn't catch you though or you'll need an actual lawyer.
Well, what's a real issue that's being ignored?
Good place to hide and it's bullet-proof.
Christ, you're like that little yappy cartoon terrier that follows around a bulldog being a complete sycophant. You're so thirsty for approval from a sad lefty who can't even make a cogent argument to support his position. All he can do is just post weak-ass sarcasm. Binary fag is pathetic, but you're way beyond him, dorko.
Or publishing easy way to cook lethal poison is also freedom of speech. Also publishing ways to encode lethal human virus. And I pass many others. *speech* in most sane countries do not encompass technical specifications, and such technical specification thus can be regulated especially if they veer to put dangerous stuff in the hand of people which would normally not be able to easily find it. That said, the US has passed the insane bar on guns a long time ago. I just hope authority here make sure any asshole doing such CAD guns get a new one reamed and put in prison.
>> I don't believe that home-printed plastic zip guns are a threat anywhere
No, there are not a threat, but a feature: They enable darwinistic natural selection
aaaaaaa
Good old Cody Wilson. I suspect he's running low on funds and needs some media facetime to pay a few bills. It's a good troll either way though. This whole episode reminds me of having to pull pgp sources off non-US servers in the early days because our freedom loving government decided encryption was a munition. It's sad to see how often attempts to ban disruptive technologies occur by default these days. No, you won't be able to 3d print a glock 19 but the idea is really what is important here. Plus, how often do you see the 1st and 2nd being at the forefront of an issue?
For all the people throwing knee jerk stereotypical responses around keep in mind the central idea of the legal filings around this is to keep source code protected as speech. I would think an OSS crowd would applaud this idea but since it's an evil baby killing gun being coded people conflate this particular speech with BAD. It's rather like banning wrong think on facebook or twitter actually. It's hard to stand up for the rights of idiots and assholes in order to protect your right to be an idiot or asshole. Since the decision to stand up is hard that should be a strong signal to make sure you do stand up.
Well, THOSE will show up on every site under the sun in about 10 seconds....
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
Wrong-o! The point of the 2nd is as a final stop against a tyrannical government. This means "military hardware". One of the founders actually addressed the exact question of canons aboard ships in regards to the 2nd early on. I'm too tired tonight to look up the exact reference though so you'll just dismiss the idea out of hand.
BATFE regs state that you can make ONE example of ANY firearm not covered under the NFA for personal use and possession. You may not sell or transfer it and it must be destroyed on your death. One of each firearm.
It's not the manufacturing that gets up the nose , it's the lie of undetectability. Anyone with any technical abilities at all knew this even before that Clint Eastwood movie Line of Fire.
And,yes...trained machinist
Yes...downloaded CAD files for other weapons
Yes...just finished my personal Quigley Sharps. Only purchased part was the barrel. Not even CNC. Pure manual.
Guys, its not that hard, its not illegal,and its not possible to stop. It's information. It's out. The hoorah is all politics and playing to the base.
You cannot control an entire country and its people with tanks, jets, battleships and drones or any of these things.
Nope. All you need is a feckless, amoral leader who will exploit people's racism, sexism, homophobia, and anti-[not_your_religion] bias to lock in 35% of the low-end population into a conspiracy-theory fueled, self-referential memetic mind-trap, then exploit their unwavering, unthinking support to demolish any inconvenient democratic institutions, norms, or check-and-balances to consolidate power. At that point you can exploit, enslave, impoverish, or kill as much of the rest of the population as you like, and have a pretty decent chance of pulling it off.
Their possession of small-arms won't even be a speed bump.
In this case, the 2nd Amendment is being stretched well beyond its original intent
Quite the opposite. The intent was to allow citizens to own military hardware. Remember the first US Navy ships were privately owned, cannons and all.
Nope. " " Militias to own muskets - and manufacturing them is a wholly different topic not stated directly. Also, this was pre-army and police.
You are completely, utterly, totally, and in all other ways wrong. The purpose was to keep military weapons in civilian hands in order to maintain a well-regulated militia. Well-regulated meant "in proper working order" and the writings of the authors and proponents of the 2a make it clear that they feared the influence of a standing, national militia. They knew that it would be harmful to freedom, and guess what? They were right. Ever since George Washington (Known by the natives as "Town Killer" for his role in massacres) instituted a standing military, it's been used to do evil — both in subjugating and controlling our own populace, and sending our young men to die in other countries for the profit of the elite.
I just stated facts.
You are miles away from the facts.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Put the designs into book format, preferably in something very easily scannable back into a computer. He can even self-publish on Amazon. Maybe find a newspaper willing to publish the designs as well. Good luck restricting it then, attorneys general!
I would not say that it is not likely in our lifetime. metal 3d makers are already out and coming down in price. It will still be few years before they are cheap enough for the backyard maker/blacksmith.
Don't know how much pressure they can take but they are using them to make universal sockets and connectors so they can take some force.
Nice! Here's an interesting idea... Set up an autoresponder e-mail (3DgunPlans@domain.com) and when you e-mail it, you get the files attached in a response...:) That would get around the injunction nicely, AND have effectively zero effort on Mr. Wilson's time!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The ATF says you're wrong. But what do they know, they're just the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, they know NOTHING about regulation of guns - not like you, AC!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
https://web.archive.org/web/20180823031614/https://thepiratebay.org/browse/605
I'm speaking of the boogie man of 3d printed plastic guns.
3d printed metal doesn't strike fear into the souls of the prohibitionists in the same way.
Really, many of us can and do fabricate metal guns right now.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
You'll get in trouble for yelling "fire" at a movie house, but not for yelling "movie" at a fire house.
Totally unfair.
your gun toys
I think this sums up your entire argument right here. You clearly have no understand of, or respect for, firearms. They are not toys. Anyone who thinks they are toys is a fool. Firearms are tools, just as speech is a tool. Perhaps you should try putting your 1st amendment 'toys' back in their box and go sit down to think about what our rights are actually meant to protect us from.
Still going to be sued by the Washington State Attorney General
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Nuclear is pretty difficult even with perfect documentation just from a process standpoint. But in any case, the personality that stabs or shoots is different from the one that bombs or poisons. Maybe one is just less likely to carry through?
Also, trying to restrict this data won't work. The world needs to plan for metal printed weapons to proliferate that may not even need traditional ammo. Fuel-air sending fishing weights down a tube for instance. We can make 3d printers illegal I guess but that seems wrong.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
Go to hell you ignorant piece of shit - your idiocy should only kill yourself and worst case your own family, not mine.
If this is really about making guns available for law-abiding citizens, then why aren't the gun manufacturers concerned about what this would do to their businesses? After all, remington and the rest are most concerned about lawful uses of their weapons; wouldn't this cut into their margins? Are they expecting that they'll make more money just selling accessories and ammo while letting the sale of the actual weapons go away? If that is the case then why do they fight so hard to make it as easy as possible to buy guns at retail (it's already easier to buy a gun in some places than it is to buy Sudafed)?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Everyone wants an 1788 parchment referring to "papers" to include iPhones.
Position bias is always ugly.
Society and legal systems have a hard time addressing new tech. Oddly, tech doesn't care. If tech is the problem, it's also the answer. New, easier, and more accessible technology keeps coming along making the government's failed attempts to thwart the old technology irrelevant.
And on it goes.
(title) which is bullshit. They had a machine gun even back then. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So any argument that they didn't know or couldn't have foreseen this is pure bullshit.
They wanted citizen to have access and own the same weapons the military does. I get that they couldn't have foreseen a Thermonuclear bomb.
This has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. It's entirely about the First.
And what's "something previously illegal" that you're talking about? It was never illegal to manufacture firearms yourself, or to 3D print them, or to share information on how to do so. At most, it was illegal to export that information (under ITAR).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Second Amendment is the only one that the framers deemed important enough to end with "Shall not be infringed."
Maybe you should spend some serious time thinking about why that is.