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
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.
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.
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.
See my sig.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
"Non-legal links" like the the very court order that this discussion is discussing. LOL.
You're an idiot. Goodnight.
>> 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.
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.'"
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!
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
Incorrect. Nowhere do they say you can only make one example of any firearm (that isn't nfa), make all you want.
They do not need to be destroyed upon your death.
They can be transferred, they just can't be manufactured with the intend of being transferred, otherwise you need to be a licensed gun manufacturer.
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.
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.
(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).