Are CAD files openly shared with the public 'free speech'?

[SmarterthanYou]

If I invented a simple device that one could attach to a vehicle that gave it the ability to triple gas mileage AND reduce carbon output and freely distributed the file to manufacture this device on a 3D printer, would you classify that as 'freedom of speech'???????

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yes

 

[SmarterthanYou]

wow.....only one person here felt smart enough to answer a simple constitutional question.

 

[Walt]

So close, and yet so far from a real hypothetical.

The real question is can 3D printers be used to get around patents. So lets say you invent a device to triple gas mileage, is it freedom of speech for me to distribute a CAD file to make it, and thus cutting you out of any profits.

To get a patent, you must make your invention public for anyone to copy. But copying things used to be complex enough that only legal factories could do it. We are entering an age when anyone might be able to copy a manufacturing process. It might be as easy as copying a music file has become.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

If I invented a simple device that one could attach to a vehicle that gave it the ability to triple gas mileage AND reduce carbon output and freely distributed the file to manufacture this device on a 3D printer, would you classify that as 'freedom of speech'???????

You are only free to distribute it as long as it isn't restricted by law.

https://www.knowol.com/information/princeton-student-atomic-bomb/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/...egal-to-post-bomb-making-instructions-online/

 

[SmarterthanYou]

You are only free to distribute it as long as it isn't restricted by law.

https://www.knowol.com/information/princeton-student-atomic-bomb/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/...egal-to-post-bomb-making-instructions-online/

so there is no freedom of speech, only privilege of speech approved by government. thanks.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

So close, and yet so far from a real hypothetical.

The real question is can 3D printers be used to get around patents. So lets say you invent a device to triple gas mileage, is it freedom of speech for me to distribute a CAD file to make it, and thus cutting you out of any profits.

To get a patent, you must make your invention public for anyone to copy. But copying things used to be complex enough that only legal factories could do it. We are entering an age when anyone might be able to copy a manufacturing process. It might be as easy as copying a music file has become.

I understand patent laws and agree with you......Nobody should be able to copy a device and undercut the manufacturer of that original device. But the question is if I make a device, original, i'm the inventor, therefore I patent it........or if it's even a very simple piece that doesn't require manufacturing, should it be considered free speech if I freely distribute it online?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I understand patent laws and agree with you......Nobody should be able to copy a device and undercut the manufacturer of that original device. But the question is if I make a device, original, i'm the inventor, therefore I patent it........or if it's even a very simple piece that doesn't require manufacturing, should it be considered free speech if I freely distribute it online?

I don't know if a design is legally considered "speech." But if it your original design and not a rip-off, I don't see why you shouldn't be free to do whatever you like with it, including sharing it. That's free enterprise, commerce, capitalism.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I don't know if a design is legally considered "speech." But if it your original design and not a rip-off, I don't see why you shouldn't be free to do whatever you like with it, including sharing it. That's free enterprise, commerce, capitalism.

Where SmarterthanYou is trying to go with this is the government is trying to restrict the sharing of designs to 3d print illegal gun parts.

https://futurism.com/federal-judge-illegal-upload-3d-printed-gun-designs

In 2015, Defense Distributed sued the government, claiming it had a First Amendment right to share the blueprints. The Justice Department argued that doing so violated export laws and threatened both national security and world peace — and both federal trial and appellate courts agreed, ruling against Defense Distributed.

What SmarterthanYou doesn't realize is he is supporting a pedophile.

founder Cody Wilson, who resigned from the company three months later after he was arrested in Taiwan, where he fled after having sex with an underage girl in Texas.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

so there is no freedom of speech, only privilege of speech approved by government. thanks.

All freedoms (rights) come with restrictions.
You can't fire a gun whenever you want in any direction you want.
You can't vote multiple times in an election.
You can't use speech to incite a riot.
Property rights don't allow you to own humans.


You are free to be as stupid as you want and you seem to be exercising that right quite well.,

 

[archives]

so there is no freedom of speech, only privilege of speech approved by government. thanks.

Can’t say how many times this has been explained to you, no right is absolute, never has been, never will be, they are all regulated because rights are based on reason, not desire

 

[SmarterthanYou]

All freedoms (rights) come with restrictions.

then they are not freedoms, they are permissions

You can't fire a gun whenever you want in any direction you want.

there is no right or freedom for that.

You can't vote multiple times in an election.

there is no right or freedom to do that

You can't use speech to incite a riot.

there is no right or freedom to do that

Property rights don't allow you to own humans.

owning a human is not a right or freedom

You are free to be as stupid as you want and you seem to be exercising that right quite well.,

you are projecting. only stupid people equate freedom as a right to do anything and everything they want.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Where SmarterthanYou is trying to go with this is the government is trying to restrict the sharing of designs to 3d print illegal gun parts.

https://futurism.com/federal-judge-illegal-upload-3d-printed-gun-designs

What SmarterthanYou doesn't realize is he is supporting a pedophile.

my support for a printed CAD file does not equate support for pedophilia. only stupid people use hyperbole to try and win an argument. and 'shall not be infringed' does not mean 'reasonable restrictions'.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Can’t say how many times this has been explained to you, no right is absolute, never has been, never will be, they are all regulated because rights are based on reason, not desire

you are WRONG!!!!!! you're allowing a supposedly tightly restricted government to regulate your rights because you are afraid of the freedom of others. there is NOTHING sensical about regulating rights.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

then they are not freedoms, they are permissions

there is no right or freedom for that.

there is no right or freedom to do that

there is no right or freedom to do that

owning a human is not a right or freedom


you are projecting. only stupid people equate freedom as a right to do anything and everything they want.

There is no right or freedom to publish cad files on the internet.
You have just admitted that free speech has limits when you agree that there is no right to use speech to incite a riot.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

you are WRONG!!!!!! you're allowing a supposedly tightly restricted government to regulate your rights because you are afraid of the freedom of others. there is NOTHING sensical about regulating rights.

Of course rights are regulated. They have to be because my rights often conflict with the rights of others.
The emancipation proclamation took away property rights from southern slave holders.

We have entered into a social compact that says we give up some of our rights so government can help to keep a civil society. The government is able to oversee some conflicts rather than leaving the resolution to the individuals. Without that we would have anarchy and no property rights.
You should read some John Locke and Adam Smith. It might open your eyes.

 

[Into the Night]

If I invented a simple device that one could attach to a vehicle that gave it the ability to triple gas mileage AND reduce carbon output and freely distributed the file to manufacture this device on a 3D printer, would you classify that as 'freedom of speech'???????

No. I would consider it 'open publication'.

 

[Into the Night]

wow.....only one person here felt smart enough to answer a simple constitutional question.

Open publication of such a device does not involve the Constitution.

 

[Into the Night]

So close, and yet so far from a real hypothetical.

The real question is can 3D printers be used to get around patents. So lets say you invent a device to triple gas mileage, is it freedom of speech for me to distribute a CAD file to make it, and thus cutting you out of any profits.

To get a patent, you must make your invention public for anyone to copy. But copying things used to be complex enough that only legal factories could do it. We are entering an age when anyone might be able to copy a manufacturing process. It might be as easy as copying a music file has become.

No. That is theft.

 

[Into the Night]

You are only free to distribute it as long as it isn't restricted by law.

https://www.knowol.com/information/princeton-student-atomic-bomb/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/...egal-to-post-bomb-making-instructions-online/

No law can prevent an open publication.
It is unconstitutional for the 'federal' government to prevent any such publication.
Title 18, $824(p) is unconstitutional.