[Discuss] public files vs export control laws

Matt Joyce matt at nycresistor.com
Fri May 10 21:03:26 UTC 2013 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT3772yhr0o  I think makerbot did a pretty
good job on the PR front regarding 3d printing with this piece.


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 2:02 PM, malcolm stanley <
a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com> wrote:

> The more we play up success in other areas of work, the less we need to
> respond negatively to the gun thing.
> In PR a useful principle to remember is that + > -, and you always want
> to steer toward the + slde.
>
> A good approach is to use the "YES and..." approach that improv comedy
> uses.
>
> IOW, when people say "opensource and 3D printing = free guns on the
> streets" it is not good to say "Thats really bad and we don't like it." as
> a leading argument.
>
> Its much more positive to say "YES, AND also manufacturing jobs, new
> medical treatments, prosthetic limbs for kids, Rockets to Mars, and whole
> host of other things, all of which show the power of technology for good as
> well as evil."
>
> We can then note that because even some of those good things can be
> dangerous if done wrong, there will sometimes need to be some semblance of
> regulation or oversight on the things being produced, to ensure that the benefits
> are realized and the dangers avoided. Again, a positive message.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> malcolm stanley
>
> google.voice:  215.821.6252
> Cell: 267.251.9479   <------------- new
> email: a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com
> twitter / linkedin: amstanley
> Read my blog at http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com
> _________________________________________
>
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Will Canine <willcanine at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I think open IP already in use and creating value is an important
>> point to cover.
>>
>> In terms of tactics, I think having an already trusted voice in the field
>> -- someone like Clay Shirky or Tim O'Rielly -- talk to a camera about this
>> issue would really help bring a moderate voice into this discussion.
>> Whether that is a youtube video or segment on a talkshow, whatever,
>> something high profile. Obviously would require some high level media
>> wrangling, but I think the right people might be interested if the right
>> people ask them (this is probably not best done by committee).
>>
>> It is also useful in these situations to try and dream up the ideal
>> headline you would like to see next as a response to all the "opensource
>> and 3D printing = free guns on the streets" type ones we are seeing now. I
>> think something like "Shirky to Wilson: 'The Open Community Doesn't Want
>> Your Guns'" or something like that can work as a starting point -- any
>> others? What lines are we trying to draw (a thick one dividing the broader
>> open source movement and free guns, for example)?
>>
>> I think that the most immediate thing we can do is start talking to our
>> friends and peers in this space and try to start sorting out how people
>> feel, and if we feel strongly one way or the other, trying to influence
>> others around us. I am sure none of us agree 100% on this issue, but I know
>> we can find some common ground -- I think the bottom line is that we *
>> could* use this media environment to continue pushing the story people
>> on this list have been devoted to for years and years: the promise of an
>> open economy.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Tom Igoe <t.igoe at arduino.cc> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree Will, good approach.  What tactics do you recommend?
>>>
>>> Let's try a positive tack: what examples of open IP can we point to that
>>> are already influencing the general public's lives for the better?
>>>
>>>
>>> t.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 10, 2013, at 3:59 PM, Will Canine <willcanine at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think you're right that there is a danger if Cody Wilson's radical
>>> voice is the only one people manage to hear -- and his combination of
>>> two controversial subjects is, as you point out, a powerful amplifier.
>>> People are listening, and the press is looking hungrily for the next step
>>> in this story.
>>>
>>> We are not in a position to influence Cody's tactics, no matter how
>>> ill-advised we might find them. We are, however, in a strong position to
>>> offer the passionate, informed, and moderate counter point in a debate that
>>> is gaining national attention. I think some sort of open letter or
>>> interview, some sort of call for a debate, something, is in order.
>>>
>>> Bottom line: I think we should be talking about our own tactics in this
>>> media situation, not just others'. What do you all think?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Matt Joyce <matt at nycresistor.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Flip side is of course you can argue that ITAR prevents other countries
>>>> from competing with us by denying them access to our special sauce.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Tom Igoe <t.igoe at arduino.cc> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What's likely to shake ITAR is money going overseas because of it. If
>>>>> I wanted to counter it, I'd show how the US is losing money because of it.
>>>>>  As a country, we've shown quite decisively lately that we have no
>>>>> political will to stop anything to do with weapons, but we sure as hell
>>>>> care when a non-American takes a job we believe is ours (whether it is or
>>>>> not).
>>>>>
>>>>> t.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 10, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Matt Joyce <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding is that ardupilot does their releases from Europe
>>>>> specifically to avoid potential ITAR violations.
>>>>>
>>>>> ITAR is fairly heavily used to restrict aerospace and space systems
>>>>> work.
>>>>>
>>>>> SpaceGambit for instance being Darpa funded cannot escape ITAR
>>>>> restrictions.  Which severely limits what they can do and with whom ( IE
>>>>> non US citizens ).
>>>>>
>>>>> In Cody's case, he is a lot more vocal about being a rebellious
>>>>> hellion than he actually is.  The man is very good at dotting 'i's and
>>>>> crossing 't's.  The DoD ITAR transgressions aren't proven and the DoD
>>>>> simply requested they formalize any classification of the specified CAD
>>>>> work.  Most of those were fairly esoteric... including designs for a tank
>>>>> shell, an adapter for an oil can silencer, and the liberator.  The
>>>>> liberator is most likely not covered by ITAR.  The tank shell probably is.
>>>>>
>>>>> But yes.  ITAR is real.  We are all required to adhere to it in the US.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Tom Igoe <t.igoe at arduino.cc> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a pretty good understanding of his tactics, I've been through
>>>>>> a number of interviews and articles, and seen similar patterns before. I
>>>>>> just think they are ill-advised. He's got two controversial topics in his
>>>>>> actions:  weapons reform, and intellectual property reform. By doing what
>>>>>> he's doing, he's tied the two together in many people's minds.  So now
>>>>>> those same people will be less receptive to the idea that intellectual
>>>>>> property regulation on its own is worth discussing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cody's chosen to take a radical stance. That's fine, but the
>>>>>> consequence of that choose is that you alienate more people than you do
>>>>>> than by taking a collaborative stance. He's got to live with that
>>>>>> consequence, and unfortunately, now so do those of us who share his
>>>>>> feelings about intellectual property reform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> t.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 10, 2013, at 1:46 PM, Will Canine <willcanine at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that Wilson's point is that regulation can't stop the
>>>>>> dispersion of disruptive designs via the Internet; he is not really looking
>>>>>> for a waver or exemption or anything like that. His point is that now it's
>>>>>> started, it can't be stopped, regulation be damned.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm as uninterested in guns as anyone here, but I do think it's worth
>>>>>> looking at what he is doing more closely -- his tactics are worth learning
>>>>>> from at the very least.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 10, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Tom Igoe <tom.igoe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd have to agree, Malcolm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> malcolm stanley <a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My experience with Export Control for encryption technologies used
>>>>>>> in consumer devices, instantiated as DRM solutions for Video on Demand
>>>>>>> movies, suggests to me that the exception being sought is somewhat ...
>>>>>>> unrealistic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Weaponization of any technology is probably a poor strategy for
>>>>>>> accomplishing the acheivement of a waiver from regulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _________________________________________
>>>>>>> malcolm stanley
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> google.voice:  215.821.6252
>>>>>>> Cell: 267.251.9479   <------------- new
>>>>>>> email: a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com
>>>>>>> twitter / linkedin: amstanley
>>>>>>> Read my blog at http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com
>>>>>>> _________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Matt Maier <blueback09 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a dilemma that's been building up for a while now. Open
>>>>>>>> source is all about sharing ideas so that anyone who wants to build them,
>>>>>>>> or build off of them, can do so. Export control is a legal regime that
>>>>>>>> makes sharing of certain ideas with non-authorized entities a federal crime.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Those of you who were at the hardware documentation jam might
>>>>>>>> remember the subject of legal constraints coming up, but at the time I
>>>>>>>> didn't have a good example.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It would seem that we now have our test case. The State Department
>>>>>>>> has ordered Defense Distributed to stop that whole "sharing guns" thing
>>>>>>>> while they review whether or not making them internationally available
>>>>>>>> violates International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/05/09/state-department-demands-takedown-of-3d-printable-gun-for-possible-export-control-violation/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cody Wilson, a law student, says that what he's doing falls into a
>>>>>>>> protected exception for non-profit public domain research. His argument is
>>>>>>>> that the files are "stored in a library" in the sense that all libraries
>>>>>>>> have internet access and there is a single bookstore in Austin providing
>>>>>>>> the published plans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Getting any kind of official exception to export control for open
>>>>>>>> source technology development would be a huge win. It would pave the way
>>>>>>>> for much more ambitious projects.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20130510/5a1d9571/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list