Defcad.com Wants To Be the Google of 3D-Printable Guns 225
Sparrowvsrevolution writes that at this year's SXSW, Defense Distributed founder Code Wilson has announced a for-profit spinoff of his gun-printing project, from which people will be able to search for and download gun-related CAD files.
"Though the search engine will index all types of files, Wilson says he hopes the group's reputation for hosting politically incendiary content will mean users trust that it won't censor search results. 'When we say you should have access to these files, people believe we mean that,' says Wilson. 'No takedowns. No removals. We'd fight everything to the full extent of the law.' Along with the SXSW announcement, Wilson also released a provocative video where he lays out the plan for Defcad.com and criticizes gun control advocates and 'collusive' 3D printing companies like Makerbot."
My first thought (Score:5, Funny)
is who would name their kid "Code". My second thought is "duh, I'm on Slashdot".
Re: (Score:2)
I think that DefCAD ought to host this whole episode, too. [youtube.com]
As long as they also host the MythBusters cautionary [youtube.com] about earth bamboo...
Re:My first thought (Score:4, Informative)
is who would name their kid "Code". My second thought is "duh, I'm on Slashdot".
Wishful thinking on behalf of the submitter - TFA has his name spelled correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
is who would name their kid "Code". My second thought is "duh, I'm on Slashdot".
Maybe they meant Cody?
Re: (Score:2)
is who would name their kid "Code". My second thought is "duh, I'm on Slashdot".
Rock star Frank Zappa [wikipedia.org] named his daughter Moon Zappa [wikipedia.org].
Falcon
Re: (Score:2)
SNL:
Asswipe: "az-WEE-peh"
No takedowns. No removals. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm .. is history about to repeat itself? I seem to remember there used to be a bunch of mp3 hosting sites that aren't here now. I'm guessing that this guy will be headed to oblivion once people start up-loading 3d scans of copywrited material - whether it is from a gun manufacturer or from Disney.
Good luck finding somewhere safe to host the servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they're out of patent protection, aren't they? So it's not even black-market.
Re: (Score:2)
"Well, they're out of patent protection, aren't they?"
That's an interesting question. Rifles of the same basic design are/were manufactured all over the Soviet Bloc and even in Egypt and China. There were so many manufacturers, I sort of assumed the design was an open standard. I did some searching however, and apparently that's not the case:
http://www.manufacturing.net/news/2009/10/russia-to-defend-ak-47-assault-rifle-copyright [manufacturing.net]
Arsenal Inc. of Nevada claims to be the "exclusive licensed US manufacturer".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
to the full extent of the law.
I took that to mean that he would fight. Not that he would necessarily be innocent or win. For all I know he may be taking an extreme stance on " [stuff] needs to be free"
However also from TFA this new site is meant as a revenue generating source - most likely for himself ("a guys gotta eat") so I am more inclined to believe that he is on more of an egotistical/screw you stance than flowers and cute ponies [wielding AK-47's].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which gets interesting because DMCA takedowns have already occurred [arstechnica.com].
Since he's selling affiliate links to people who can make it for you or other things, things would get murky very fast.
Forget guns - they'll quickly become just a tiny part of the site -
Re: (Score:2)
Got to have something to use for target practice.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for logos, there's not a lot of gun IP left. A small amount of shifting, and the copyright restraints dissolve. There are more recent patents for semi-automatics, but the technology's been around for generations, so patents have mostly expired.
Death, however, has been around forever although I think Bezos will try to patent something there, one day soon.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for logos, there's not a lot of gun IP left.
I don't think its the lack of gun IP that will do him in, rather the opportunity by other parties (such as Disney for want of a better example) to take him down, which *co-incidently* takes down the gun stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
If he hosts copyrighted material and attracts it for dissemination, then yes, he invites criminal and civil litigation.
Hosting doesn't necessarily cause a problem. Invitation to piracy steps over several lines depending on the jurisdiction.
Re: (Score:2)
So then they will go to bittorrent or whatever the next big thing is. While old fogies will just get the stuff off usenet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...
Yes, they are, they cost about $100 and walmart sells them.
You may have heard of them, they are called 'Kinect' and with oversampling, the resolution is rather impressive.
Google for Kinect Fusion or here is one of the related links: http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/6/4071162/kinect-fusion-3d-object-scanning-coming-in-future-kinect-for-windows [theverge.com]
Three words (Score:2)
Tor Hidden Services
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)#Hidden_services [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I got it a gun with Micky Mouse(r) ears for iron sights!
That... that actually sounds kinda awesome...
Re: (Score:2)
Would files for 3D printing be considered creative expression that falls under copyright, like software?
Would patents related to the object apply to the 3D printer files? Or only to the printed object?
Would the printed 3D object be covered under copyright?
You will probably get different answers for different types of final products, and also varying answers from various lawyers and judges.
uh oh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Better just move the hosting to North Korea right now and get it over with, lol.
You think think the Glorious Leader will welcome with open arms someone who believes his mission is to give uncontrollable numbers of weapons to the masses? I
Re: (Score:2)
Lack of access to guns isn't what's keeping the North Korean people in check, proof positive that a right to bear arms isn't a utopian solution to a dictatorial government.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, they don't. Unless you consider their entire male population as reservists but ignore everyone else's. Which they do and we don't.
Don't let actual knowledge of the situation prevent you from submitting a truthful depiction of the situation or anything, always better to sensationalize and lie.
NRA: free speech champs (Score:2)
Two great causes that go great together.
If you're a first amendment activist, you should be opposed to takedown efforts because censorship is bad, whether you're talking about porn, Wikileaks, DeCSS or 3D printer plans for guns.
And Code (really? Code?) should hook up with the NRA and get their lobbying dollars on his side. After all, 3D printers don't kill people, people WITH 3D printers kill people.
(Alternate joke: you can take my extrusion depositor when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I dunno if the NRA would want to be on his side when the copyrighted designs of the gun manufacturers that support them are being posted on his website...
Re:NRA: free speech champs (Score:5, Informative)
Copyrighted designs aren't really much of a thing in the gun industry. As a matter of fact tons of clones and copies are made of various designs.
The Mauser bolt action is cloned by countless companies.
The AR15 design is cloned by at least a few dozen different companies.
The Colt 1911 design is cloned by Kimber, Rock Island, STI, SVI, Ruger, Remington, S&W, Springfield, Taurus, and about a bazillion more.
The Beretta 92 design is cloned by both Taurus and Turkey
The Walther P99 is cloned by Canik.
The CZ-75 design is cloned by Tanfoglio and Canik.
The Glock is cloned by Timberwolf
The Ruger 10/22 is cloned by Volquartsen
And so forth for many, many models. Gun technology in use today has been nearly perfected for close to 100 years. It truly is more about just making a quality product than the "IP" so many other industries worry about.
Re:NRA: free speech champs (Score:5, Informative)
The NRA doesn't represent the gun manufacturers. It's an association of dues-paying individual members.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
The problem with Free Speech is that most people have nothing important to say, so they need a gun to make you listen.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Free Speech is that most people have nothing important to say, so they need a gun to make you listen.
Exactly right. Unfortunately, this is /., so you've been immediately modded as "flamebait."
The flame you're baiting me with is the fire of truth.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Free Speech is that most people have nothing important to say, so they need a gun to make you listen.
No, the problem is a demonstrator with a sign using free speech can not stop a tank as happened in the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 [wikipedia.org]. Free speech didn't help the 2009–2010 Iranian election protests [wikipedia.org]. And it's not helping much in Syria today. Without firearms to back up free speech free speech means little, is practically useless, and may get demonstrators killed.
Falcon
Re: (Score:3)
And yet all those millions of Iraqis with AK-47s didn't change anything in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Maybe your analysis is a little lacking?
Re: (Score:3)
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. But never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by laziness.
Frankly Code, no one gives a damn. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Frankly Code, no one gives a damn. (Score:4, Insightful)
Calling it "hosting politically incendiary content" isn't going to make it so.
I'm getting the feeling that we are only talking about this because he is an attention-whore who is slinging around some meaningless words in order to drive traffic to his site.
Re: (Score:2)
If memory serves, at least the first-gen 3d printed designs were direct adaptations from http://www.cncguns.com/ [cncguns.com] CAD files, and that site has been up with little or no controversy for some years now. I assume that there has been some adaptation since then to support the limitations of 3d printing hardware.
Yeah, yeah, '3d printers' are magic star-trek replicators from the future, and CNC gear is old-and-busted-industrial-economy-getting-your-hands-dirty; but small scale weapons manufacture really isn't news(
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Frankly Code, no one gives a damn. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not the government that is out to get you, the freedom-loving individual. It's the other freedom-loving individuals, whose freedom and yours have come into conflict. They're the ones who will fight you, and they're the ones who will use the government as a weapon in that fight.
The government is indeed a brutal tool, but it's a double-edged sword, that will decide for itself who will be struck. That decision is based on the opinions of judges throughout history, who have made decisions on the subjective evidence of whose freedom must be suppressed to bring about the most benefit for society.
To sway those judges to your favor, promise and demonstrate a benefit to society and respect for the freedom and happiness of others. To turn those judges against you, promise to incite mayhem and subvert government authority, and give others the tools and encouragement to do so.
Re:Frankly Code, no one gives a damn. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not the government that is out to get you, the freedom-loving individual. It's the other freedom-loving individuals, whose freedom and yours have come into conflict. They're the ones who will fight you, and they're the ones who will use the government as a weapon in that fight.
If you're of the persuasion that you have a right to force others (or have the government force others on your behalf) to give up their freedoms so you can have some warm, fuzzy feeling, you do not fit the description of "freedom-loving individual."
Re: (Score:2)
Don't think judges care about freedom and happiness, they are there to legitimize the government by insuring its regulations are consistent, even they are written by Satan himself.
Except a number of Supreme Court rulings have found what the federal government does unconstitutional. Regarding FDR's New Deal [wikipedia.org] the Supreme Court ruled the National Recovery Administration [wikipedia.org] (NRA) and the first version of the Agricultural Adjustment Act [wikipedia.org] (AAA) unconstitutional. After they did this FDR tried to add more Justices to the Supreme Court as well as force current Justices to retire when they reached 70 years old. Opponents accused him of Court Packing [wikipedia.org] for this attempt.
Then again the Justices rubber s
Your point dissolves in reality (Score:2)
What you are doing is perfectly legal, has been for years.
That's very true.
But it ALSO didn't stop the plans from being yanked from other 3D printing repositories.
And it ALSO did not stop a printer manufacturer from pulling a 3D printer that he had already rented, and refusing to allow him to rent.
To me it doesn't matter WHO he is fighting, what matters is that in a short time he has seen very real censorship around this topic and thus exhibited a strong need for what he is providing. So in fact, contrary
Re: (Score:2)
The government really doesn't care because making a gun is perfectly legal.
What makes this much more interesting is the fact that I'm from a country where making guns is definitely not legal, and the government actually cares. Furthermore, I would really expect this to be the current norm globally.
Internet really makes the world much smaller. It's going to be interesting to see how things will play out.
Unless your government allows you to have barrel assemblies and ammunition shipped in, I don't think they have a whole lot to worry about from printed guns.
No more than they already had to worry about CNC milled guns, anyway.
Interesting intersection of Patent and Copyright (Score:5, Interesting)
So for a CAD file of a gun, the CAD file could be copyrighted... but it would be copyrighted by the author, not by the manufacturer of the gun it was a clone of (unless they were the author, of course). Now, printing out the gun might be manufacturing something covered by patents... but copying the file wouldn't be creating the gun.
3D printing will sure be interesting from a legal standpoint, it potentially brings copyright and patent law together for just about everything. I would hope that we could establish that CAD files for 3D printers are equal to recipes for the purposes of copyright: a series of steps to create something. But that's certainly not what happened for source code.
Re: (Score:2)
Less drama more substance (Score:5, Insightful)
How about before you become the google of something you prove that this even exists.
Show me a working 3d printed gun. Not a lower for an AR, not a magazine, but an actually working 3d printed gun. That means you have to 3d print the parts that go bang. Otherwise you are just 3d printing gun accessories.
Re:Less drama more substance (Score:4, Funny)
"I sell guns and gun accessories."
Re:Less drama more substance (Score:5, Informative)
By law the lower for an AR IS the gun. Except for the serialed received every other component of a gun is considered parts.. Its the only part that requires a background check, and under most pending legislation will be the only actual part banned from sale to civilians (largely the same for magazines).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So what?
A lower without an upper is useless. That means all they have to do is update the law. Making barrels is still a lot harder to do, same with actions. The law is outdated and should regulate the parts that are hardest to produce.
Re: (Score:2)
Barrels would be a bad choice, because general-purpose parts will do it with some adaptations. A good bit of plumbing will do as a shotgun barrel. No rifling, obviously, but that's only an issue if you care about range.
Re: (Score:2)
So then make it the receiver.
That is the part that is considered the gun when dealing with bolt actions.
Colt should never have been allowed to serialize the lower. You can make a lower out of sheet metal by hand. They are trivial to construct via many methods other than 3d printing.
Re: (Score:2)
Colt should never have been allowed to serialize the lower. You can make a lower out of sheet metal by hand.
You can make SOME lower receivers out of sheet metal by hand, but not an AR15 lower. The AK-47 is far easier to duplicate in that regard. Here's a guy that made one out of a shovel . . . http://thebrigade.thechive.com/2012/12/06/diy-shovel-to-ak-47-50-photos/ [thechive.com]
Anyways, making a gun at home isn't illegal. All that matters is that one part that is necessary for the operation of the gun be serialized as the receiver so that the whole thing can't be sold/mailed. How hard the part is to reproduce isn't an issu
Re: (Score:2)
So what?
A lower without an upper is useless. That means all they have to do is update the law. Making barrels is still a lot harder to do, same with actions. The law is outdated and should regulate the parts that are hardest to produce.
You mean... the bullets?
Re: (Score:2)
No, those are very easy to produce.
The receiver is machined, not 3d printed. In all other firearms it is considered the firearm.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gun powder is trivial to make. Especially for old black powder cowboy guns.
All this stuff was made in the 1800s so by today's standards it is all pretty simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullets are INCREDIBLY easy to make at home. As a matter of fact due to the recent ammo shortages I've been casting my own from scrap lead.
A GOOD reloading setup that will make ammo as good or better than factory ammo will cost you less than $300. Lee Precision actually makes loading kits that will do nearly as good a job (though with a lot more effort and frustration) for around $25.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullets are INCREDIBLY easy to make at home. As a matter of fact due to the recent ammo shortages I've been casting my own from scrap lead.
A GOOD reloading setup that will make ammo as good or better than factory ammo will cost you less than $300. Lee Precision actually makes loading kits that will do nearly as good a job (though with a lot more effort and frustration) for around $25.
My bad. I was thinking the entire cartridge. Suppose you no longer find gun powder/caps...
Re: (Score:2)
Powder is fairly easy to make. Charcoal, sulfur, and saltpeter mixed and ground in the proper ratios. Granted that's traditional black powder not the smokeless powder we mostly use today, but it still goes bang just fine.
As an ignition source ("caps") there are several options. Homemaking a berdan primer would be possible as the anvil is in the case (which can be reused - most people don't reload berdan primed cases as they're a hassle but in this scenario they'd be easier). All you'd need is something
Re: (Score:2)
The law is outdated and should regulate the parts that are hardest to produce.
BS. The law needs to be pulled out from the law books by it's roots and left to shrivel and die.
Falcon
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What they print is referred to as a "stripped" lower, like the frame of a car. fire controls and various parts within it are 5$ items. springs, pins, and various pieces of shaped metal.
All of which can easily be machined on any number of readily available pieces of equipment; CNC mill, drill press, et. al.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, save the springs, those are kind of a bitch to manufacture in a home-based shop.
Re: (Score:2)
Except right now they cannot even print a full lower receiver. All they can print is the lower receiver frame.
Correct, and as I said, that part is legally the gun. Every other part including those that go into the lower receiver is unregulated.
Re:Less drama more substance (Score:4, Informative)
For a car analogy, its the frame and the engine. If you can make receivers, you're in the league with Ford and Toyota. If you make buttstocks and compensators, you're that company that sells import tuner supplies and curb feelers for gigantic low-riders.
Re: (Score:2)
I am in favor of some gun control, like all rational gun owners are. Some people should not be allowed to own guns, children, the insane, violent felons.
The lower being the gun was always a bad idea. It should be the action.
Immediate Goal (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When the name of your company turns into a verb, you know you're successful.
Or commoditized [wikipedia.org], i.e., kleenex, xerox, band-aid, etc
dailymail? (Score:2)
3d printable guns? As in water guns for kids? Or do you mean real guns? You can't even make a 3d printer hotend with a 3d printer, how would printing a working gun be possible?
What's next, search engines with 3d printable nuclear warheads?
This is all just a lot of posturing (Score:2)
1. There are plenty of people with access to a machine shop and the correct skills to build a gun right now. And they can build *all* the parts, including ones exposed to gasses and pressures different than ambient air. This adds nothing new.
2. If in fact home 3D printing gets to the point that you can actually manufacture a working gun (not just a "part") then it is also going to be able to manufacture replacement car parts, replacement parts for other machines, or entire machines. Then they are going to g
The answer remains the same (Score:2)
Seed autonomous, self-powered file servers throughout the world. Allow anyone to upload/download information from them. Then there will be no way to ever limit information again.
Looking at printers now (Score:2)
Makerbot will not me getting my money however, closed their source and censorship. That says to me they are really not interested in my business.
Re:Punk (Score:5, Funny)
"It's a .44 Defcad, the most powerful handgun printed, and it'll blow my hand clean off. So - hey, knock it off with the laughter!"
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
False dichotomy.
Why can't it be both?
Re: (Score:2)
False dichotomy.
Why can't it be both?
Fair enough - closeted homosexual with diminutive phallus it is!
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, 100 million gun owners all have them because they wish their penises were longer.
So, Anonymous Coward, if it has nothing to do with your small penis, if all your guns were bright pink you'd be perfectly find with that?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, 100 million gun owners all have them because they wish their penises were longer.
So, Anonymous Coward, if it has nothing to do with your small penis, if all your guns were bright pink you'd be perfectly find with that?
You don't have to have a small penis to not like bright pink as a color, or a penis at all. :P
That said, if people only own guns to make their penis feel bigger then why do women own them? Old men?
Also, bright pink is a really impractical color for a gun but it'll do the job no matter what color it is.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm being a bit pedantic, but I think you catch my drift.
Re: (Score:2)
Real guns are generally made of quality metals and/or very high quality ceramics.
Until your 3D printer can do those, you're just printing a really cheap-ass stock.
Or, you're printing a really cheap-ass mold for the high-grade stock you're going to make later.
Until someone comes out with a high-grade polymer for 3D printers, I think this (using the printed item as a mold for further production) will be the way to go.
Re: (Score:2)
Two words: Not really.
Unless you can show me the 3D printer which will withstand upwards of 1500 C. And, no, gluing the stuff together is not a good idea.
Re: (Score:3)
I hate gun nuts as much as you, and yet I applaud what he is doing. We need more repositories for printable 3D objects on the Internet.
In the US there is a tradition of unsavory characters you wouldn't leave alone with your dog defending your freedoms. People like Larry Flynt and RMS and this guy.
Re: (Score:2)
How can something like SXSW let a dangerous gun nut speak?
Same way Slashdot lets stupid marginalizing assholes like you speak - they respect the First Amendment.
You, obviously, do not.
Why are we letting this small group of very insane people get so much speaking time on our media?
Uh, Equal Time Provision maybe? Gotta provide a counter-point to all those left-wing fringe lunatics who also receive a fair amount of media attention.
The whole point of printable guns is to bypass laws and safeguards meant to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of the mentally unstable.
No, it's not.
Correspondingly, there is a huge intersection between the mentally ill and gun nuts because crazy people hoard weapons and are obsessed with defense and doomsday scenarios.
No, there's not.
Side note: I never have figured out how someone like this AC can, in one breath, refer to anyone who disagrees with them as "insane people," then subsequently posit some seriously off-his-nut shit not a par
Re: (Score:2)
Any time these people do anything I can't help but feel like they are shills with the express purpose of providing an excuse to legislate 3D printing into the ground.
By that logic, Gutenburg was a shill for the original copyright laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I honestly don't think that's physically possible...
They practically give those things away at gun shows. If you've ever fired one, you know why.
Re: (Score:2)
It will happen. The CNC machine and the 3D printer will morph together. I will be able to program my own gun parts design and share/sell it over the Internet. People will improve on my design and we will have much better guns and other products. Can you imagine 10 million people working on a design for the perfect AR15? Colt can't pay 10 million designers, just like Microsoft can't pay the millions of programmers that have written tho open source software we use every day.
What good is a gun without ammunition? (what if instead of controlling guns, the US govt would switch to ban ammunition and/or gun powder and/or primers? It'd be just as simple as to make "illegal to possess or handle explosives in any shape, form or packaging without a license"... this in the name of "the war on terror")
Re: (Score:3)
I do wonder then if you can use other fuels as a propellant, anything from propane onwards can be compressed and ignited to force a projectile, not unlike in an IC engine.
What is the government going to do? Ban everything from Gasoline onwards? No flammable fuels anymore?
That does not even touch on the fact that gunpowder is trivial to make yourself. If people could make it hundreds of years ago with their technology level, I'm sure a suitably driven individual could do it now in his backyard.
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to be a struggle for government to implement a ban that covers only a certain class of semi-auto rifles and accessories. A full ban on ammunition? They'd probably do it if they could, but I don't see it happening anytime in the near term.
Pretty good actually (Score:3)
What good is a gun without ammunition?
Given that the person you are aiming the gun at has no idea if it is loaded or not, actually pretty good as a deterrent.
That ignores of course the incredible ease with which you can make something to fire out of a gun (worst case, you can make a breech-loader and fire anything at all).
Re: (Score:2)
What good is a gun without ammunition? (what if instead of controlling guns, the US govt would switch to ban ammunition and/or gun powder and/or primers? It'd be just as simple as to make "illegal to possess or handle explosives in any shape, form or packaging without a license"... this in the name of "the war on terror")
Banning ammo would be even harder. Although few do it some people make their own ammo [ehow.com]. Making gunpowder [dangerousl...tories.org] is and isn't easy. Ammo shells can repeatedly be reused. And it's easy to form new slugs by melting old ones.
Falcon
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
Whenever some fool suggests that government should ban ammunition instead of guns, I suggest that they bring a case of ammo across the border and try to convince U.S. customs that it doesn't fall under the classification of "arms".
Every country in the world treats ammunition as "arms" from an import/export and regulatory standpoint.
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason why this is even a story is because people make a big deal out of it. "Spirit of defiance" and all that (nevermind that it's perfectly legal). Note that the guy's message is less about the utility of the thing, and more about giving the middle finger to "them".
Re: (Score:2)
Well, FWIW, that is a far more useful purpose than counterfeiting Darth Vader bobbleheads. And a lot less likely to run afoul of current IP law.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if you can "3D print a DVD".
I'm gonna go ahead and guess a big fat NO on that one. For obvious reasons.
Then again, give the technology a few more iterations, and that may very well become a possibility.
That wouldn't constitute piracy would it? It's just digital representation of a a physical object. =)
Try counterfeiting (which, technically, defines all computer "piracy").