Pretending That Instructions To Print A Gun Aren't Out There Won't Change The Reality That They Are
from the why-can't-our-government-live-in-reality dept
We recently had an article about how intellectual property makes people pretend to be stupid, by forcing us to pretend that digital works act in the same way as physical products do, even though we know that they don't. This seems silly, but it goes beyond just copyright. There's been a lot of hubbub recently concerning 3D printed guns. While there's been some discussions about them in the past, it went into overdrive last week when the first fully 3D-printed gun was unveiled. The plans were uploaded online and... over 100,000 people downloaded them.And then the US government freaked out, as the State Department argued that the company that put the files online may have violated export control laws.
The government says it wants to review the files for compliance with arms export control laws known as the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR. By uploading the weapons files to the Internet and allowing them to be downloaded abroad, the letter implies Wilson’s high-tech gun group may have violated those export controls.Remember, this file has already been downloaded over 100,000 times. It's not going to be removed from public access. That's reality. But the laws that demand we pretend to be stupid include pretending that something like this is stoppable, when plenty of sites are still making them available.
“Until the Department provides Defense Distributed with final [commodity jurisdiction] determinations, Defense Distributed should treat the above technical data as ITAR-controlled,” reads the letter, referring to a list of ten CAD files hosted on Defcad that include the 3D-printable gun, silencers, sights and other pieces. “This means that all data should be removed from public access immediately. Defense Distributed should review the remainder of the data made public on its website to determine whether any other data may be similarly controlled and proceed according to ITAR requirements.”
As Rick Falkvinge notes, the whole idea of pretending you can delete these files from existence and keep it under control suggests a very confused US government. Not only is the concept impossible, but even stepping in like that has only drawn much more attention to the files. Falkvinge points out that this highlights how the US government is "unfit to set and shape Internet policy, due to their simply not understanding of what the internet is and how it works." Of course, that hasn't stopped them before.
I recognize that a 3D printable gun freaks some people out. But just because some people are freaked out, it doesn't mean we should deny reality and pretend it's possible to disappear these plans when it's clearly not. I don't know about you, but I prefer a government that deals in reality, rather than one that chooses to act stupid on purpose.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 3d printed gun, 3d printing, guns, reality
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Smart People: How? Just because the filename says "Gun Blueprint" doesn't make it a gun blueprint. It could be something else altogether. We can't view the file as that would be an invasion of privacy. We can't delete files "just to make sure" because that would be chilling speech. Even if we're sure that it is a gun blueprint, there's nothing stopping anyone from uploading them again - not even blocking files based on hashes will work, because even the most minute change to the file results in a different hash. We could stop people from uploading to our site, but that won't stop people from going to other sites that do allow uploading.
In short, even the most drastic of measures we could take to stop the proliferation of controversial files is harmful to speech, stupid and ultimately pointless.
Now, just replace the words "gun blueprint" with the word "content" and you get why I'm against copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and in what alternate reality has this actually happened? Obviously not this one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What will the TSA do? Start looking for nails when they can't even spot full scale constructs that look like real weapons? What will anybody do now that simple metal detectors can't detect with this home made gun?
I wonder if these morons will now start focusing in delivering justice to those who commit any crimes and stop trying to impose heavy surveillance and disproportionate penalties/laws on the general population?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Double Barrel Bunny, Semi Auto Simian (monkey gun), Denture Derringer, ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds familiar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_in_the_United_States
Repeating history and failing the same way. Yay America! We're Number 1!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sounds familiar
The result was that the US lost its lead in cryptography. Very few people or companies would work on it in the US -- your market was then limited to the US. If you worked on it anywhere else, you could market to the whole world, including the US. So most development (and experts) went overseas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sounds familiar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sounds familiar
DES was (and is) considered weak. That's why companies that had to export crypto (such as banks) used triple-DES to put some strength back into it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sounds familiar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sounds familiar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Sounds familiar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-takes-over-distribution-of-censored-3d-printable-gun-130 510/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
books
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The U.S. government is well beyond confused. Our government is morally bankrupt, willfully ignorant, and hopelessly corrupt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/10/oh_no_its_the_plastic_3d_gun/
So "BOTH" sides, whether those promoting 3D printing or fainting over it, are just stoopid.
Sheesh. With such ignorant promoters as for this "high tech" gun, might as well be ginned-up by gun-grabbers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
People have been making zip guns for years. Dangerous as hell but safer than any 3D printed gun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
As such, this is an interesting situation, distribution of knowledge, gov't attempts to contain it, etc...
Just cause the gun itself sucks and pipe bombs are more lethal by far doesn't obviate the actual discussion being had (at least here, I know CNN's been a bit shrill about this).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
Can you print out bullets for these guns ?? I doubt it, so when you purchase bullets you have to show your gun license.
A plastic unregistered gun is still an unregistered gun, and therefore illegal.
As it is illegal to manufacture a gun that cannot be easily detected by a metal detector.
No way I would try to use one, statistics show that in the US if you own a gun, and are killed by a gun, it will probably be from the gun you own !!!
The value will be even higher, if the gun has a high probability of blowing up in your face.
I therefore hope, or you loony yanks make millions of these and try them out, it will solve a lot of problems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
And the fact that it's illegal is meaningless. That's the whole point. They can yell and scream but they can't stop it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
You can already , and have been able to for a long time, download the information for making a $2 duct tape Zip gun from the internet. As far as I can tell, this has not led to the development of Duct Tape weapon warfare or more lethal duct tape guns. I throw in the latter because it is the bullet that is the significant lethal component of a gun. Unless the gun gives a bullet super powers to kill multiple people per shot, the bullet is not becoming more lethal.
As for the direct 3D-printing of guns, this is really a novelty, it is the wrong tool for the job unless it is being used in larger manufacture process. The materials being used in the printer are not adequate for a gun, and there is no hint of adequate materials becoming feasible with the sub $20,000 3d printers. I want to point out that CNC machines are capable of manufacturing the parts on whatever material of choice, but it a subtractive manufacturing process unlike the addative process of 3D printing, so it doesn't get people's imaginations in gear the same way.
Now, admiteddly if the 3D printed parts were used to make silicon molds that were then used with proper casting resins, you can achieve the same non-metal build with much better characteristics.
The point is there are many more ways that are better suited to manufacturing and distrubuting weapons and weapons parts/plans/designs. Most of these methods are still cheaper and require less skill. So anyone can achieve better results than what has been and can be achieved with an equivalent investment in a 3D printer, making whatever the current iteration or whatever it develops into a novelty in comparison.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Weenies both sides: promoting and worry over TOY gun.
Wait a minute, did I just agree with ootb?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
Oh the horror.
Posting first completely undermines our democratic society. And capitalism.
Pirates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
Were you expecting to get the privilege, or be on par with people who pay?
Are you a grifter?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
Sometimes WEEKS ahead of time! Watch the fabric of reality turn into a basket of snakes around you now!! Yu freetard that pay for early access to content which now makes no sense cause how can you be a freetard but pay for things that are free...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
Now watch his brain explode when he finds out that's one of the ways Mike makes money on his public domain articles. The horror!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
Lemme guess, you wanna get early access for free, just like the dirty pirates you constantly deride for doing the exact same thing? Talk about "Do as I say, not as I do".
Oh and about the fair playing field? Does having your comment first mean you've automatically won the debate? It takes two to tango, so no. So what if a hundred Insiders turn up and comment? That doesn't mean that you are suddenly at a disadvantage.
Blue, you're something else, and none of it good. You proclaim yourself a champion of copyright but not once have you ever actually defended it properly. You turn up, spew your garbage, and run away like the coward you are. Your garbage has nothing at all to do with defending copyright, but at best are merely attacks on those whom you deem your enemies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Board note: fanboys now get in FIVE hours early!
Laughing my ass off at you, Blue. Too funny.
This one is so simple I think even you can understand it. Stop whining, register an account and buy one of the packages that includes the Crystal Ball feature and Ta-Da! you can spout your inane, useless crap before an article goes live too. I'm pretty sure Mike will take anyone's money, whether it's from a fan, a critic or anyone else for that matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=3d-printing-manufacturing-plastic-gun
Meanwhile, trying to suppress the information is a waste of time. It'll get out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oh, wait, can CAD be used outside the US?
And, and, information can be posted on the Intertubes OUTSIDE the US???
OH the Humanity!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is actually a win for the State Department
The only reason the State Department stepped in is because these plans actually did get a lot of attention and got people talking. When people complain about how imaginary terrorists have access to undetectable plastic guns, the State Department orders them to pull the plans, declares victory, and goes home. They assuage the fears of the political hand-wringers, but most importantly, they stop the conversation that Defense Distributed was trying to start by putting their "investigation" on hold indefinitely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Imposter
One hundred thousand times is virtually impossible to wipe from the internet. I don't care what they try to do it's too late.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
3d printed or machined either way firearms are MAKEable
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 3d printed or machined either way firearms are MAKEable
Everyone acts like this is a new thing. The ATF has known about home building for decades. And 3d printed guns are just home built from a computer. We already have laws governing home building already so it isn't like we've been caught flat footed. And no I don't see 3d printed guns as a panic inducing threat most uploaders try to make them out to be. If anything the gun manufactures should be worried about the conceal carry lines but that's about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anyone remember Phil Zimmerman?
Also, I read in the Daily Mail, (UK) that they printed out a version and carried it on a train right past security. They didn't have a firing pin or bullet though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong target?
Shouldn't ITAR be applied against the 3d Printing technology? The printer, after all, is (a) much tougher to get, and (b) much more expensive, than merely downloading a useless file.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
file under: who could have predicted that...
as night follows day, so do idiot lawmakers (am i being redundant?) chase bad laws with more bad laws...
dog damn, i hates me some stoopid...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ITAR
§ 120.3 Policy on designating and determining defense articles and services. An article or service may be designated or determined in the future to be a defense article (see § 120.6) or defense service (see § 120.9) if it:
(a) Is specifically designed, developed, configured, adapted, or modified for a military application, and
(i) Does not have predominant civil applications, and
(ii) Does not have performance equivalent (defined by form, fit and function) to those of an article or service used for civil applications;
or (b) Is specifically designed, developed, configured, adapted, or modified for a military application, and has significant military or intelligence applicability such that control under this subchapter is necessary. The intended use of the article or service after its export (i.e., for a military or civilian purpose) is not relevant in determining whether the article or service is subject to the controls of this subchapter. Any item covered by the U.S. Munitions List must be within the categories of the U.S. Munitions List. The scope of the U.S. Munitions List shall be changed only by amendments made pursuant to section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).
I do not see how the liberator could possibly fall under the above definition. The liberator was created for civilian use by civilians and is unlikely to be used to used in a military force.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ITAR
Easy, it falls ITAR because the government doesn't like it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You got away with it once...
The DoD knows that there is spillage in this case and will take the necessary precausions associated with spillage. It is not pretending that it can put the genie back in the bottle. What it is doing however is making sure a company that is in violation of US law end's it's violation as early as possible.
This is like saying if you catch someone in the middle of a burgulary you should let them take as much as they can carry before stopping them. It's foolish. Yes the information is out there. Yes it's been reposted. But that doesn't mean that the company who never should have posted it in the first place should continue support the distribution of information that should have never been public in the first place (according to the law).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You got away with it once...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a licence to kill
how do we do it? well you gotta have a driving license. to get that license you gotta pass a driving test. if you want to take your car out in public it's gotta have a license plate, which is in a national/state database, etc etc.
all the components are there... just replace car with gun and voila. now THAT would be a well regulated militia, as per the actual text of the 2nd am.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: a licence to kill
You've solved the problem...oh, wait...
In United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875), the Supreme Court ruled that "[t]he right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government."
From Wikipedia - http://goo.gl/zZ2kN
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't own a 3D printer, but spiting morons is an endless source of joy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can't stop the signal, Mal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]