Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Federal Judge Strikes Down DoJ's Deal with Defense Distributed

posted by martyb on Thursday November 14 2019, @10:08AM   Printer-friendly
from the now-it's-Defense...Disturbed? dept.

takyon writes:

Trump deal to share 3D-printed gun blueprints online ruled 'unlawful'

A federal judge has struck down a decision by the Trump administration to allow blueprints for 3D-printed guns to be shared online.

In a ruling published Tuesday, Judge Robert Lasnik said the deal made in July last year was "arbitrary and capricious" and thus a violation of the federal Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution.

The original deal was part of a settlement between the Justice Department and Texas-based nonprofit Defense Distributed, which garnered worldwide attention in 2013 with its claims to have created the world's first "100 percent 3D-printed gun." The dissemination of plans for the gun was blocked by the Obama administration, but last year Defense Distributed successfully sued the government and had the ban reversed, arguing that it was a free speech violation.

[...] Bloomberg notes that the decision may still have limitations, given that Defense Distributed worked around a previous, temporary ban on downloading plans by simply mailing blueprints directly to customers. Said [spokesperson Chad] Flores: "The speech these states want so badly to censor is already on the internet and always will be."

Also at Bloomberg, NYT, and CBS.

Previously: Landmark Legal Shift for 3D-Printed Guns
[Updated] Defense Distributed Releasing Gun Plans, President Trump "Looking Into" It
Federal Judge Imposes Preliminary Injunction Against Defense Distributed's DEFCAD

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Federal Judge Strikes Down DoJ's Deal with Defense Distributed | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 24 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 14 2019, @02:34PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 14 2019, @02:34PM (#920342)
    I downloaded those files and I'm still distributing those files on my website. What are you gonna do now? If everyone does the same thing, the government is gonna need to sue a lot of people.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 14 2019, @03:16PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 14 2019, @03:16PM (#920362)

    They only have to put a few like you in jail for 20 years for that to stop.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 14 2019, @05:14PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 14 2019, @05:14PM (#920410)
      It's called the First Amendment. What the government is doing is unconstitutional, and they know it. I'm noy being sued nor suing, so that injunction doesn't apply to me. Prior restraints are unconstitutional after all. My circuit is conservative so if they do arrest me I have a very good chance of winning. And if the Supreme Court did pick up the case, for whatever reason, they are also conservative and would rule in my favor. As long as stay out of the 9th Circuit, I'm good. :)

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Fnord666 on Thursday November 14 2019, @03:43PM (2 children)

    by Fnord666 (652) on Thursday November 14 2019, @03:43PM (#920374) Homepage

    I downloaded those files and I'm still distributing those files on my website. What are you gonna do now? If everyone does the same thing, the government is gonna need to sue a lot of people.

    I'm assuming there's a magnet link available somewhere for the files?