3D Printing restrictions and bans - Revision history

Natsirtium: Added references to specific laws.

2026-05-14T01:01:06Z

Added references to specific laws.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:01, 14 May 2026
Line 28:		Line 28:

	====Overbroad applications====		====Overbroad applications====
	While consumers treat 3D printers as the definition of a device that extrudes materials to create a 3-dimensional object, the legal definition of a 3D printer is far more broad to cover any machine that handles either additive or subtractive ~~creation of a desired part~~.{{~~Citation needed~~\|~~reason~~=~~Check comment~~}} <!-~~- We will need to be flipping through legal sources on this~~, ~~but regions such as WA have treated CNC machines and Prusas under the same category~~.		While consumers treat 3D printers as the definition of a device that extrudes materials to create a 3-dimensional object, the legal definition of a 3D printer is far more broad to cover any machine that handles either additive or subtractive manufacturing.
			<ref>{{cite web
			\|title=HB 2321 - 3D printer blocking tech. (Original Bill), Section 1(7)
			\|url=https://wa-law.org/bill/2025-26/hb/2321/1/
			\|website=wa-law.org
			\|access-date=2026-05-13
			}}</ref>
			<ref>{{cite web
			\|title=House Bill 26-1144 (Introduced), Section 1(4)(f)
			\|url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bill_files/111311/download
			\|website=Colorado General Assembly
			\|access-date=2026-05-13
			}}</ref>

	~~Article which mentions this, but doesn't directly provide the legal definition:~~		Simply put, while this regulation may be intended to target just the consumer definition of 3D printers, CNC machines, laser cutters, and more, may also fall under this legal scrutiny.
	~~https://www.geekwire.com/2026/proposals-take-aim-at-3d-printing-tech-to-strengthen-washington-state-laws-against-ghost-guns/ -->~~Simply put, while this regulation may be intended to target just the consumer definition of 3D printers, CNC machines, laser cutters, and more, may also fall under this legal scrutiny.

	====Overbroad enforcement<!-- This section absolutely needs to call for examples -->====		====Overbroad enforcement<!-- This section absolutely needs to call for examples -->====

Andrew V: /* References */

2026-04-14T19:47:11Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:47, 14 April 2026
Line 19:		Line 19:

	==='''Loss of ownership'''===		==='''Loss of ownership'''===
	Locks, applied either via software or hardware, most likely will block the end-user from having the capability to repair, modify, or maintain printers they legally own. On the legal front, the end-user cannot bypass these locks thanks to [[DMCA Section 1201\|section 1201]] of the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]]. On the corporate front, [[e-fuses]], [[Digital rights management\|DRM]], and more will likely be applied in an attempt to block the end-user from repairing, modifying, or maintaining their 3D printers for the sake of legal compliance, despite regular maintenance being mandatory for the functionality of these printers.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=3DISM \|date=May 1, 2025 \|title=3D Printer Maintenance Checklist (Monthly, Weekly Tasks) \|url=https://3dism.org/3d-printer-maintenance-checklist-monthly-weekly-tasks/ \|access-date=Mar 28, 2025 \|website=~~3dism.org~~}}</ref> This would effectively treat the end-user as a licensee than the owner of both the hardware and software they purchased.		Locks, applied either via software or hardware, most likely will block the end-user from having the capability to repair, modify, or maintain printers they legally own. On the legal front, the end-user cannot bypass these locks thanks to [[DMCA Section 1201\|section 1201]] of the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]]. On the corporate front, [[e-fuses]], [[Digital rights management\|DRM]], and more will likely be applied in an attempt to block the end-user from repairing, modifying, or maintaining their 3D printers for the sake of legal compliance, despite regular maintenance being mandatory for the functionality of these printers.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=3DISM \|date=May 1, 2025 \|title=3D Printer Maintenance Checklist (Monthly, Weekly Tasks) \|url=https://3dism.org/3d-printer-maintenance-checklist-monthly-weekly-tasks/ \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260208143647/https://3dism.org/3d-printer-maintenance-checklist-monthly-weekly-tasks/ \|archive-date=2026-02-08 \|access-date=Mar 28, 2025 \|website=[[3DISM]]}}</ref> This would effectively treat the end-user as a licensee than the owner of both the hardware and software they purchased.

	==='''Loss of functionality'''===		==='''Loss of functionality'''===
Line 59:		Line 59:
	\|Washington State		\|Washington State
	\|Proposed legislation addressing 3D printing technology that may unintentionally restrict lawful consumer ownership, modification, or use of consumer 3D printers.		\|Proposed legislation addressing 3D printing technology that may unintentionally restrict lawful consumer ownership, modification, or use of consumer 3D printers.
	\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=HB 2321 - 2025-26 \|url=https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2321&Year=2025 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=Washington State Legislature}}</ref>		\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=HB 2321 - 2025-26 \|url=https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2321&Year=2025 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260310234307/https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2321&Year=2025 \|archive-date=2026-03-10 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[Washington State Legislature]]}}</ref>
	\|-		\|-
	\|HB 2320		\|HB 2320
Line 65:		Line 65:
	\|Washington State		\|Washington State
	\|Related proposed legislation addressing risks associated with 3D printing technology, which has raised concerns about potential impacts on lawful consumer use and operation of consumer 3D printers.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Edwards \|first=Cam \|date=2026-02-08 \|title=Washington Dems Advance Bill That Could Ban 3D Printers Over Gun Fears \|url=https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2026/02/08/washington-dems-advance-bill-that-could-ban-3d-printers-over-gun-fears-n1231483 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/xvTvu \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=Bearing Arms}}</ref>		\|Related proposed legislation addressing risks associated with 3D printing technology, which has raised concerns about potential impacts on lawful consumer use and operation of consumer 3D printers.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Edwards \|first=Cam \|date=2026-02-08 \|title=Washington Dems Advance Bill That Could Ban 3D Printers Over Gun Fears \|url=https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2026/02/08/washington-dems-advance-bill-that-could-ban-3d-printers-over-gun-fears-n1231483 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/xvTvu \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=Bearing Arms}}</ref>
	\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=HB 2320 - 2025-26 \|url=https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?Year=2025&BillNumber=2320 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=Washington State Legislature}}</ref>		\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=HB 2320 - 2025-26 \|url=https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?Year=2025&BillNumber=2320 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260317193526/https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?Year=2025&BillNumber=2320 \|archive-date=2026-03-17 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[Washington State Legislature]]}}</ref>
	\|-		\|-
	\|Assembly Bill A2228		\|Assembly Bill A2228
Line 71:		Line 71:
	\|New York State		\|New York State
	\|Proposed legislation addressing the regulation of 3D printed items, raising concerns that enforcement mechanisms could indirectly affect consumer access to, or use of, 3D printing equipment.		\|Proposed legislation addressing the regulation of 3D printed items, raising concerns that enforcement mechanisms could indirectly affect consumer access to, or use of, 3D printing equipment.
	\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=Assembly Bill A2228 \|url=https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A2228 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[The New York State Senate]]}}</ref>		\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=Assembly Bill A2228 \|url=https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A2228 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251213142640/https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A2228 \|archive-date=2025-12-13 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[The New York State Senate]]}}</ref>
	\|-		\|-
	\|Letter regarding 3D printer policies		\|Letter regarding 3D printer policies

Andrew V: /* References */

2026-04-14T19:43:07Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 14 April 2026
Line 77:		Line 77:
	\|New York County		\|New York County
	\|Public correspondence outlining concerns related to consumer 3D printers that has been cited in discussions about potential technical or policy restrictions affecting lawful consumer activity.<!-- Might just need to be moved to a new section -->		\|Public correspondence outlining concerns related to consumer 3D printers that has been cited in discussions about potential technical or policy restrictions affecting lawful consumer activity.<!-- Might just need to be moved to a new section -->
	\|<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Bragg \|first=Alvin \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=Letter-Creality-3.26.25.pdf \|url=https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Letter-Creality-3.26.25.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=}}</ref>		\|<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Bragg \|first=Alvin \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=Letter-Creality-3.26.25.pdf \|url=https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Letter-Creality-3.26.25.pdf \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260319203332/https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Letter-Creality-3.26.25.pdf \|archive-date=2026-03-19 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=}}</ref>
	\|-		\|-
	\|AB-2047		\|AB-2047
Line 83:		Line 83:
	\|California		\|California
	\|Proposed legislation that would require a certified firearm blueprint detection algorithm in all 3D printers and make it a crime to knowingly disable, deactivate, uninstall, or otherwise circumvent any firearm blocking technology installed in a 3D printer.		\|Proposed legislation that would require a certified firearm blueprint detection algorithm in all 3D printers and make it a crime to knowingly disable, deactivate, uninstall, or otherwise circumvent any firearm blocking technology installed in a 3D printer.
	\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=AB-2047 Firearms: 3-dimensional printing blocking technology. \|url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB2047 \|url-status=live \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=California Legislative Information}}</ref>		\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=AB-2047 Firearms: 3-dimensional printing blocking technology. \|url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB2047 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/mq248 \|archive-date=2026-04-14 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=California Legislative Information}}</ref>
	\|-		\|-
	\|HB26-1144		\|HB26-1144

Andrew V: /* Legislative and regulatory examples */

2026-04-13T18:34:37Z

Legislative and regulatory examples

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:34, 13 April 2026
Line 55:		Line 55:
	!Legislation Link		!Legislation Link
	\|-		\|-
	\|HB 2321		\|[[Washington house bill 2321 regarding 3d printers\|HB 2321]]
	\|2025		\|2025
	\|Washington State		\|Washington State

Sojourna: /* References */

2026-04-08T01:23:58Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:23, 8 April 2026
Line 127:		Line 127:

	==References==		==References==
	[[Category:~~Common terms~~]]		{{Reflist}}
	~~<references />~~
			[[Category:Anti-consumer practices]]

Keith: Keith moved page 3D Printing Restrictions and Bans to 3D Printing restrictions and bans: sentence casing

2026-03-30T18:50:20Z

Keith moved page 3D Printing Restrictions and Bans to 3D Printing restrictions and bans: sentence casing

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:50, 30 March 2026
(No difference)

Andrew V: /* References */

2026-03-30T15:29:10Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:29, 30 March 2026
Line 46:		Line 46:
	==Examples==		==Examples==

	=== Legislative and regulatory examples ===		===Legislative and regulatory examples===
	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
	\|+		\|+
Line 102:		Line 102:
	\|Print&Go Tech		\|Print&Go Tech
	\|2024		\|2024
	\|Company promoting technical solutions intended to prevent the printing of certain prohibited items, referenced in discussions about content filtering, software enforcement mechanisms, and their potential impact on consumer control and repairability.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-02-08 \|title=3D Printer Ban Company Exposed \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGEVra9U91I \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=tGEVra9U91I \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-11-04 \|title=3D GUN'T: Print&Go’s solution to prevent 3D printed ‘Ghost Guns’ \|url=https://printandgo.tech/blog/3d-gunt-solution-to-prevent-3d-printed-ghost-guns \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/TBCWF \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[Print&Go]]}}</ref>		\|Company promoting technical solutions intended to prevent the printing of certain prohibited items, referenced in discussions about content filtering, software enforcement mechanisms, and their potential impact on consumer control and repairability.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Loyal Moses \|date=2026-02-08 \|title=3D Printer Ban Company Exposed \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGEVra9U91I \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://preservetube.com/watch?v=tGEVra9U91I \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2024-11-04 \|title=3D GUN'T: Print&Go’s solution to prevent 3D printed ‘Ghost Guns’ \|url=https://printandgo.tech/blog/3d-gunt-solution-to-prevent-3d-printed-ghost-guns \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/TBCWF \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=[[Print&Go]]}}</ref>
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
Line 121:		Line 121:
	*<!-- Company name -->		*<!-- Company name -->

	=== Companies not enforcing restrictive policies<!-- Convert to table format when list is no-longer blank --> ===		===Companies not enforcing restrictive policies<!-- Convert to table format when list is no-longer blank -->===
	''This list is intentionally left blank pending verified, neutral sourcing.''		''This list is intentionally left blank pending verified, neutral sourcing.''

JamesTDG: Fixed hidden bullet points via source editor, shouldn't break editor's brains while tweaking this article.

2026-03-28T10:20:08Z

Fixed hidden bullet points via source editor, shouldn't break editor's brains while tweaking this article.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:20, 28 March 2026
Line 91:		Line 91:
	\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=Prohibit Three-Dimensional Printing Firearms & Components \|url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1144 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/bj124 \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref>		\|<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2026-03-09 \|title=Prohibit Three-Dimensional Printing Firearms & Components \|url=https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1144 \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/bj124 \|archive-date=2026-03-09 \|access-date=2026-03-09 \|website=Colorado General Assembly}}</ref>
	\|}		\|}
	*

	*

	*

	===Manufacturer and platform policies===		===Manufacturer and platform policies===
Line 120:		Line 115:
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}
	*

	===Companies enforcing restrictive policies<!-- Convert to table format when list is no-longer blank -->===		===Companies enforcing restrictive policies<!-- Convert to table format when list is no-longer blank -->===

JamesTDG: /* Examples */ Table formatting

2026-03-28T10:09:29Z

Examples: Table formatting

Show changes

JamesTDG: Cleanup run - "Why it is a problem"

2026-03-28T09:59:15Z

Cleanup run - "Why it is a problem"

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:59, 28 March 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:
	==Why it is a problem==		==Why it is a problem==

	~~These~~ restrictions ~~raise several consumer rights concerns~~:		With legal restrictions and bans applied to 3D printers, there are numerous faults that arise:

	*'''~~Right to repair~~''' ~~– Hardware~~ or ~~software locks may make it illegal~~, ~~impractical, or technically impossible for owners~~ to repair, modify, or maintain printers they legally own.		=== '''Loss of ownership''' ===
	*'''Loss of functionality''' ~~– Printers may become~~ partially or fully inoperable if a manufacturer ~~discontinues support~~, ~~shuts down services~~, or ~~enforces new restrictions~~.		Locks, applied either via software or hardware, most likely will block the end-user from having the capability to repair, modify, or maintain printers they legally own. On the legal front, the end-user cannot bypass these locks thanks to [[DMCA Section 1201\|section 1201]] of the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]]. On the corporate front, [[e-fuses]], [[Digital rights management\|DRM]], and more will likely be applied in an attempt to block the end-user from repairing, modifying, or maintaining their 3D printers for the sake of legal compliance, despite regular maintenance being mandatory for the functionality of these printers.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=3DISM \|date=May 1, 2025 \|title=3D Printer Maintenance Checklist (Monthly, Weekly Tasks) \|url=https://3dism.org/3d-printer-maintenance-checklist-monthly-weekly-tasks/ \|access-date=Mar 28, 2025 \|website=3dism.org}}</ref> This would effectively treat the end-user as a licensee than the owner of both the hardware and software they purchased.
	*'''~~Forced obsolescence~~''' ~~– Devices may stop working due~~ to ~~policy~~ or ~~software changes rather than hardware failure~~.
	*'~~''Overbroad~~ regulation~~''' – Laws~~ intended to ~~address specific risks~~ may ~~unintentionally affect lawful uses such as~~ education, research, prototyping, art, or hobbyist projects.		=== '''Loss of functionality''' ===
	*'''Precedent for other industries''' ~~– Similar restrictions could expand~~ to ~~copyright~~- ~~or patent-protected replacement~~ parts, such as automotive, ~~appliance~~, or industrial components.		3D printers will have an increased likelihood of becoming partially or fully inoperable due to various variables. With how [[Digital rights management\|DRM]] may be applied to these devices, they may be required to communicate with privately hosted servers from the manufacturer to verify if the printer or what it is printing is compliant with regulations. If these servers lose functionality, such as from the manufacturer going defunct, temporary outages<!-- Such as the AWS East-1 incident or Crowdstrike -->, or [[Planned obsolescence\|forced obsolescence]], these printers may lose vital functionality as well.
	*'''Ownership versus licensing''' – Consumers may ~~effectively be treated as licensees rather than owners~~ of ~~their~~ hardware ~~and software~~.
			=== '''Overbroad regulation''' ===
			The legal front of regulation is excessively overbroad:

			==== Overbroad applications ====
			While consumers treat 3D printers as the definition of a device that extrudes materials to create a 3-dimensional object, the legal definition of a 3D printer is far more broad to cover any machine that handles either additive or subtractive creation of a desired part.{{Citation needed\|reason=Check comment}} <!-- We will need to be flipping through legal sources on this, but regions such as WA have treated CNC machines and Prusas under the same category.

			Article which mentions this, but doesn't directly provide the legal definition:
			https://www.geekwire.com/2026/proposals-take-aim-at-3d-printing-tech-to-strengthen-washington-state-laws-against-ghost-guns/ -->Simply put, while this regulation may be intended to target just the consumer definition of 3D printers, CNC machines, laser cutters, and more, may also fall under this legal scrutiny.

			==== Overbroad enforcement<!-- This section absolutely needs to call for examples --> ====
			The most common applications for 3D printers are within education, research, prototyping, art, or hobbyist projects, all of which are traditionally legal applications. Depending on how this may be enforced, the end-user could be punished for making a part that could be used in the manufacture of a firearm, as the simplicity of firearm construction may lead to mundane parts being unable to be printed, regardless of intent.<!-- Definitely cite California legislation here -->

			=== Harmful precedents ===

			==== Legal precedents ====
			When legislation is passed, it sets the foundation for related legislation to be more capable of passing. Restrictive legislation against 3D printers may extend to the creation of additional laws that harms the ability for consumers to modify, maintain, or repair other devices they may own. <!-- We'll need to discuss potential related legislation in the future, such as how this may extend to repairing or building personal computers - JamesTDG -->

			==== '''Precedent for other industries''' ====
			Companies may be enabled to include locks that block the end-user from manufacturing parts for repair in other devices, forcing consumers to only be capable of procuring parts from approved sellers in industries such as automotive, home appliances, or even industrial components. This blocking may extend to also halting consumers from repairing devices that are no-longer supported by the manufacturer, forcing hardware that once was easily repairable to become mere waste that they will have to replace with a newer model<!-- Unsure if I should include any mention of further anticonsumer risks associated with being forced to buy newer hardware or if it'll make this line too tangential. --> instead of fix.

	==Examples==		==Examples==