Pentagon removes plastic 3D gun plans from the 'net...
- Thread starter tobnpr
- Start date
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
I assume their justification will be the Arms Export Control Act.
It's a little late... it was downloaded, what?, 50,000 times? The genie is out of that bottle.
It's a little late... it was downloaded, what?, 50,000 times? The genie is out of that bottle.
Evan Thomas
Inactive
Link?
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Link:
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/break...ntrol-of-3d-printed-gun-makers-fileswebsite/#
The DEFCAD site confirms it:
http://defcad.org/
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/break...ntrol-of-3d-printed-gun-makers-fileswebsite/#
The DEFCAD site confirms it:
http://defcad.org/
Spats McGee
Administrator
That's a very good question, but given that the site says that the US Department of Defense Trade Controls made the request, I'm guessing it's the same authority that allows the federal government to restrict exports of computers & other hardware & software that is easily convertible to weapon systems.
dakota.potts
New member
This makes me uneasy. I think it could be argued this runs counter to 1st, 2nd, 4th, and maybe 5th amendment rights. They're claiming import and export laws, but as long as the guns don't cross state lines, that should mean nothing.
Over 100,000 people downloaded the files and they're already hosted on offshore file download sites where the US government can't really touch them.
Over 100,000 people downloaded the files and they're already hosted on offshore file download sites where the US government can't really touch them.
ITAR controls the export and import of not only weapons and munitions, but also the technical data to build them. The argument is that posting the data online where foreign nationals can readily access it is effectively exporting it. Violations of ITAR can result in criminal penalties of up $1,000,000 and/or 10 years in prison per violation.
dakota.potts
New member
I have a very hard time believing that making data publicly available is the same as importing or exporting it. If that were the case, everybody who posts a guide on how to make an AK fully automatic on the internet should be arrested and charged with transferring a machine gun. This is not the case.
Nickel Plated
New member
I still don't get what authority they have to suppress this information?
How is this different from posting a set of plans for manufacturing a gun on regular machine tools. I bought a book that gives step by step instructions for building a fully-automatic SMG. (The P.A. Luty book, all for educational purposes only of course
) You can download plans for any number of firearms online including .50BMG rifles. How come those haven't been taken down yet?
Sounds like the feds freaking out about a scary new thing and facing a lawsuit pretty soon.
How is this different from posting a set of plans for manufacturing a gun on regular machine tools. I bought a book that gives step by step instructions for building a fully-automatic SMG. (The P.A. Luty book, all for educational purposes only of course
) You can download plans for any number of firearms online including .50BMG rifles. How come those haven't been taken down yet?Sounds like the feds freaking out about a scary new thing and facing a lawsuit pretty soon.
There are exceptions to ITAR regulations for technical data published in the "public domain". The public domain in this case means readily available to the general public. My understanding is that simply publishing on the Internet does not meet the definition of "public domain" in regards to ITAR (most likely because the wording predates the widespread use of the Internet and hasn't been updated).
IANAL, however, and ITAR is a huge and complicated issue that I don't claim to fully understand. This is just my understanding to the best of my knowledge of how it works, but I make no guarantees in regards to my accuracy.
That could be it. Things like encryption schemes and certain trade techniques can be classified as falling under ITAR regs, and perhaps this is what happened here.
EDIT: Turns out they're invoking ITAR. This is the letter sent to Defense Distributed:
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
The actual department is the Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance.
So, naturally we have a Streisand Effect. You can't really just, you know, take something off the internet. Doesn't work that way.
As it stands now, the file is being rehosted all over the place. By trying to clamp down on it, the government has ensured that it is being more widely disseminated than it ever would have been if they'd just left it alone.
This guy's shop project may soon become an interesting civil liberties test case.
Last edited:
I'm no lawyer but I doubt that the feds will go after him as long as keeps it down, but he isn't the first to run get a cease and desist notice. Back in the 90s Phil Zimmerman came under investigation for PGP. Rebel that he was his workaround was to publish the source code in book form using an OCR friendly font . The case was dropped soon after because the genie had left the bottle.
. The case was dropped soon after because the genie had left the bottle.You are correct. It's the Department of State Directorate of Defense Trade Control.
http://www.pmddtc.state.gov/
DOD makes it much more sinister than DDTC.
Last edited:
I am fairly familiar with ITAR regulations.
This is a correct synopsis of the law. Some may argue that ITAR is an infringement on 1st ammendment rights, but this law primarily affects the big defense contractors, and if Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop-Grumann thought they could challenge it, their pockets are deep.... it would not be a pro bono situation
. The fact that they do not challenge it is telling.
In 1994, Bruce Schneier wrote a book on cryptography which contained algorithms in the form of C code. The book was by far the most comprehensive and effective book on military grade encryption that had been written to date. My Recollection is that the US Government (I believe the NSA) attempted to prevent publication on the grounds that the book was, for all intents and purposes, a weapon because it contained actual computer code. The publisher sued (I have no citation), the court ruled that the Government can not restrict the publication of a book in paper form, but the book can not be exported in electronic form (such as a PDF). As of 1999 this was still the case. I don't know the status today, but I do know that this case established certain precedents that are followed today in the world of ITAR regulations
https://www.cdt.org/crypto/legis_104/schneier_ltr.html
Jim
This is a correct synopsis of the law. Some may argue that ITAR is an infringement on 1st ammendment rights, but this law primarily affects the big defense contractors, and if Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop-Grumann thought they could challenge it, their pockets are deep.... it would not be a pro bono situation
. The fact that they do not challenge it is telling.In 1994, Bruce Schneier wrote a book on cryptography which contained algorithms in the form of C code. The book was by far the most comprehensive and effective book on military grade encryption that had been written to date. My Recollection is that the US Government (I believe the NSA) attempted to prevent publication on the grounds that the book was, for all intents and purposes, a weapon because it contained actual computer code. The publisher sued (I have no citation), the court ruled that the Government can not restrict the publication of a book in paper form, but the book can not be exported in electronic form (such as a PDF). As of 1999 this was still the case. I don't know the status today, but I do know that this case established certain precedents that are followed today in the world of ITAR regulations
https://www.cdt.org/crypto/legis_104/schneier_ltr.html
Jim
This is a really big oversimplification...
But, as I understand it, ITAR relates to defense, and military technology.
What could be the justification of including this under that categorization?
IOW, as the above-poster mentioned, information on "home-built" weapon systems is, and has been , readily available for many years and does not fall under ITAR.
Do you suppose it is because of the new technology allowing comparative ease of manufacture- and they consider it a threat to defense?
But, as I understand it, ITAR relates to defense, and military technology.
What could be the justification of including this under that categorization?
IOW, as the above-poster mentioned, information on "home-built" weapon systems is, and has been , readily available for many years and does not fall under ITAR.
Do you suppose it is because of the new technology allowing comparative ease of manufacture- and they consider it a threat to defense?
This just doesn't make sense to me.
We are not talking about plans for a missile, a jet fighter or a tank.
We are not talking about classified technology not available in the rest of the world.
You can find detailed spec's on every single aspect of constructing an AR-15 online, why is this any different?
If I posted a program online that would let CNC machines of a cartain brand mill out lowers would that violate any federal laws?
This is just desperation and its too late.
The Design has already been downloaded all over the world, in a couple of months you will see ever further improved designs online.
I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing these in Syria!
Edit: Interesting, found a list of 9 other things taken down the same day from other sites. Article here
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...-pistol-wasnt-the-only-thing-secstate-wanted/
We are not talking about plans for a missile, a jet fighter or a tank.
We are not talking about classified technology not available in the rest of the world.
You can find detailed spec's on every single aspect of constructing an AR-15 online, why is this any different?
If I posted a program online that would let CNC machines of a cartain brand mill out lowers would that violate any federal laws?
This is just desperation and its too late.
The Design has already been downloaded all over the world, in a couple of months you will see ever further improved designs online.
I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing these in Syria!
Edit: Interesting, found a list of 9 other things taken down the same day from other sites. Article here
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...-pistol-wasnt-the-only-thing-secstate-wanted/
Last edited:
I suspect that DDTC is trying to establish a precedent. They don't care about a novelty firearm like this Liberty gun... they want to get out in front of the issue and establish that all 3d printer plans relating to firearms are subject to their export authority... no different than blueprints or engineering data.
Including, online videos and instructions on how to easily finish 80% AR lowers- NO FFL required- with nothing but a drill press. Heck, if you were good enough you could probably do it by hand.
I know the NRA has it's hands full these days, but I doubt (make that- I'm sure, this is the Federal Government) this guy's pockets are deep enough. I hope he is able to secure a pro-bono defense, it will indeed be an interesting precedent.