SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Judge allows temporary ban on 3D-printed gun files to continue
A federal judge in Seattle has ruled against Defense Distributed, imposing a preliminary injunction requiring the company to keep its 3D-printed gun files offline for now.
US District Judge Robert Lasnik found in his Monday ruling that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed based on their argument that the Department of State, in allowing for a modification of federal export law, had unwittingly run afoul of a different law, the Administrative Procedure Act. In essence, the judge found that because the Department of State did not formally notify Congress when it modified the United States Munitions List, the previous legal settlement that Defense Distributed struck with the Department of State—which allowed publication of the files—is invalid.
As Ars has reported, Defense Distributed is the Texas-based company involved in a years-long lawsuit with the Department of State over publication of those files and making them available to foreigners. The company runs DEFCAD, perhaps the best-known online repository of gun files.
[...] Judge Lasnik's ruling today only briefly addressed the fact that the files are already available on numerous sites, including Github, The Pirate Bay, and more. These files have circulated online since their original publication back in 2013. (Recently, new mirrors of the files have begun to pop up.) "It is not clear how available the nine files are: the possibility that a cybernaut with a BitTorrent protocol will be able to find a file in the dark or remote recesses of the Internet does not make the posting to Defense Distributed's site harmless," he wrote.
Will legalnauts with gavels smack down this injunction?
Previously: Landmark Legal Shift for 3D-Printed Guns
[Updated] Defense Distributed Releasing Gun Plans, President Trump "Looking Into" It
Related: The $1,200 Machine That Lets Anyone Make a Metal Gun at Home
FedEx Refuses to Ship Defense Distributed's Ghost Gunner CNC Mill
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday August 28 2018, @01:48PM (4 children)
That seems like a very hypocritical position.
We don't today go after anyone who provided an unregistered gun to a killer. As a nation we seem to like the idea of unregistered illegal guns with no background checks. No limitations on who can own a gun.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 28 2018, @03:47PM (1 child)
It happens. Not often but there are cases of suppliers getting mail time.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Tuesday August 28 2018, @05:32PM
That is an obvious typo. I'll assume you meant male time.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday August 28 2018, @05:46PM (1 child)
We don't today go after anyone who provided an unregistered gun to a killer.
Yes we do. [atf.gov]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday August 29 2018, @01:22PM
Enforcement doesn't seem to be uniform. Maybe even selective. If enforcement were working then the loopholes, especially gun shows, would not be complained about so much.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.