Cody Wilson Explains Defense Distributed Liberator/ITAR strategy (3D printed pistol)

[Dean Weingarten]

DD ITAR Update 1

A few have criticized how quickly I responded to the DDTC and began participating in their regulatory process. It is said I should have stood and fought if I believed in keeping the files free, instead of complying. This compliance has been viewed as some kind of ultimate one, as if I don’t intend to do anything else.

“No takedowns, ever.” Was a motto I had built into my vision of DEFCAD.com, not DEFCAD.org, and it referred to a strategy for dealing with intellectual property claims and social pressure- this is NOT the strategy DD/DEFCAD.org can adopt with the Department of State. It seems we may have to have our rights declared in court to simply keep developing gun files to put into the public domain. DD’s right to exist is being challenged.

DD has maintained counsel for many months, and it happens that my strategy is not to just have DEFCAD seized and DD sued out of existence. No, as ever, I think DD/DEFCAD can win. The Liberator was a victory. DEFCAD serving near a million files is a victory. Letting the State Department get that global spotlight was a victory.

The Internet was asked to choose between guns and the control of information. Guess what it chose? We created an important moment for understanding a future with 3D Printing, and the Liberator is rightly everywhere.

Now the demonstration is over, and the hard work of having all our rights preserved is just beginning. ITAR might cover 3DP technical data for generations if DD doesn’t intelligently challenge this assertion of authority.

These politicians have looked like absolute monsters in the vacuum.

I will not apologize for knowing how to choose the battle.

Source

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/05/cody-wilson-explains-defense.html

 

[Ryanxia]

Interesting, regardless of what happens to that particular company, they won't be able to keep files like this out of the hands of the public.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

If they can take down defcad for a file of a printable gun, then wouldn't any book or file that instructed on how to build guns be regulated by ITAR and as such banned from ownership or publication. Wouldn't CAD files commonly used by CNC Mills to make 60% receivers for 1911s be outlawed as well. What about CAD templates for AK flats, you can buy those or print them out.

 

[Ryanxia]

If they can take down defcad for a file of a printable gun, then wouldn't any book or file that instructed on how to build guns be regulated by ITAR and as such banned from ownership or publication. Wouldn't CAD files commonly used by CNC Mills to make 60% receivers for 1911s be outlawed as well. What about CAD templates for AK flats, you can buy those or print them out.

Legally perhaps but practically no. Once a few people have it it will spread (in some ways similar to how pirated movies/music is shared) although if there are strict penalties for being caught there would some added security to the process.

 

[CoRoMo]

The State Department's letter indicates that what occurred might have been unlawful; a violation of ITAR. If they feel strongly enough about it, I imagine that they will bring charges against the fellows at DefDist, i.e. Cody Wilson. He will then have to defend himself in court and become the test case that he must always have known that he would be.

Best of luck to him. I hope he beats them well. It would be a shame for him to do time over all of this.

 

[pseudonymity]

If they can take down defcad for a file of a printable gun, then wouldn't any book or file that instructed on how to build guns be regulated by ITAR and as such banned from ownership or publication. Wouldn't CAD files commonly used by CNC Mills to make 60% receivers for 1911s be outlawed as well. What about CAD templates for AK flats, you can buy those or print them out.

CAD files in electronic format or object code may fall under ITAR restrictions, but in a circuit court ruling in Bernstein vs. US, printed source code that could be used to build ITAR restricted items (cryptography protocols in this case) are protected speech. So there is some background already available on where the line between ITAR and 1A protections lies.

 

[Bruno2]

That is the most interesting part of this to me is the 1A POV and not so much the 2A. I know it will be a while before this all gets sorted out, but I am on the edge of my seat.

 

[rugerdude]

The problem with the govt. trying to control and suppress this information is that by doing so they have caused it to be way more popular than it would have been had they just ignored it. TONS of people downloaded the file for the gun despite not owning guns, and not having access to a 3d printer. We want what people tell us we can't have and in this day and age the risks are absolutely minimal when it comes to downloading something. The internet is just too big to police.

I also like the first amendment focus, because even the people who don't care one way or another about guns DO care about their freedom of speech.

 

[barnbwt]

If they can take down defcad for a file of a printable gun, then wouldn't any book or file that instructed on how to build guns be regulated by ITAR and as such banned from ownership or publication.

Actually, such logic would give the Feds dominion over any information on the 'net that could be possibly ruled "applicable to military applications," which would encompass not only this entire forum, but probably the entire 'net as well (since it was developed in part for military communications purposes)

Slippery slope nothing--that's a damn cliff right there, and one even this administration has no appetite for going over. DefCAD took down the files, the Fed's authority was recognized, Cody got his publicity; everyone wins.

I expect no further action on this besides an unofficial "cease and desist" (you know, a veiled threat ) against DefCAD promoting any more projects. If Cody wishes to press his luck, he will have to wait for this ITAR thing to blow over before poking the bear once more. At that point, he'll at least have a dismissed/abandoned case bolstering his argument that what he's doing is acceptable. But this case will not be slow-walked for years until Cody gives up, or the agency's administration changes (good luck with that)

TCB

 

[Bruno2]

I also like the first amendment focus, because even the people who don't care one way or another about guns DO care about their freedom of speech.

If you think about it, this is exactly what the Redcoats went around doing, they smashed all the print presses to keep the people from communicating and getting info out that would ignite a revolution.

 

[Bruno2]

I expect no further action on this besides an unofficial "cease and desist" (you know, a veiled threat ) against DefCAD promoting any more projects. If Cody wishes to press his luck, he will have to wait for this ITAR thing to blow over before poking the bear once more. At that point, he'll at least have a dismissed/abandoned case bolstering his argument that what he's doing is acceptable. But this case will not be slow-walked for years until Cody gives up, or the agency's administration changes (good luck with that)

This scenario is epic to say the least. The gov can shut down FFL's b/c they have a federal license and they can wait until a hearing is over ruling not guilty to the defendant before they give permission to resume operations. They really cant IMO in this scenario. I don't have to prove my innocence , you have o prove my guilt. I know the shut down was voluntary, but it sounded to me like if he didn't they would do it for him. Which is wrong any way you slice it.

 

[Twmaster]

I'm trying to understand how these files are any different from the books out there by authors such as Bill Holmes.