Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

After Court Order, 3D-Printed Gun Pioneer Now Sells Pay-What-You-Want CAD Files (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the tussle-continues dept.

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.

4 of 338 comments (clear)

  1. I have no issue with this by oldgraybeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trying to hide knowledge never protected anyone from anything.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

  2. Yep - he is by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re: Yep - he is by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not really a First Amendment issue though.

      Why can't you shout "fire" in a theatre?

      Censorious trope two. Who says that you can't shout "fire" in a theater, especially when it's true?

      The Pentagon Papers case did not allow for suppression of true information where the consequences of that speech were "dire." The Federal government agreed that this information was not within the scope of ITAR and that it could not prohibit publication. The judge in issuing this very injunction admitted that "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."

      Note: personally I support DD here, I'm just refuting the argument that it's a simple 1st Amendment issue.

      Then why are you attempting to justify the outrage here using exception-to-the-first-amendment arguments?

  3. Re:I have no understanding of this, FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.