Washington house bill 2321 regarding 3d printers: Difference between revisions
Added archive URLs for 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot |
Added archive URLs for 1 citation(s) using CRWCitationBot |
||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
The question of whether computer code constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment remains partially unresolved. In 2016, during the ''Defense Distributed v. U.S. Department of State'' litigation, the Fifth Circuit declined to rule on the merits of the First Amendment claims, instead deciding the preliminary injunction on non-merits requirements. In her dissent, Judge Edith Jones wrote that the State Department ''"barely disputes that computer-related files and other technical data are speech protected by the First Amendment."''<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-50759-CV0.pdf |title=Defense Distributed v. U.S. Dep't of State |website=United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |date=2016-09-20 |access-date=2026-01-21 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250222140857/https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-50759-CV0.pdf |archive-date=22 Feb 2025}}</ref> | The question of whether computer code constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment remains partially unresolved. In 2016, during the ''Defense Distributed v. U.S. Department of State'' litigation, the Fifth Circuit declined to rule on the merits of the First Amendment claims, instead deciding the preliminary injunction on non-merits requirements. In her dissent, Judge Edith Jones wrote that the State Department ''"barely disputes that computer-related files and other technical data are speech protected by the First Amendment."''<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-50759-CV0.pdf |title=Defense Distributed v. U.S. Dep't of State |website=United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |date=2016-09-20 |access-date=2026-01-21 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250222140857/https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-50759-CV0.pdf |archive-date=22 Feb 2025}}</ref> | ||
The case settled in July 2018 with the State Department waiving prior restraint against Defense Distributed and paying approximately $40,000 in legal fees. State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert stated the government ''"would have lost this case in court, or would have likely lost this case in court, based on First Amendment grounds."''<ref>{{cite web |url=https://nationalpost.com/news/world/trump-now-says-3-d-printable-guns-dont-make-sense-it-was-his-administration-that-helped-make-them-available |title=Judge temporarily blocks posting of blueprints for 3D printed guns |website=National Post |date=2018-08-01 |access-date=2026-01-22}}</ref> | The case settled in July 2018 with the State Department waiving prior restraint against Defense Distributed and paying approximately $40,000 in legal fees. State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert stated the government ''"would have lost this case in court, or would have likely lost this case in court, based on First Amendment grounds."''<ref>{{cite web |url=https://nationalpost.com/news/world/trump-now-says-3-d-printable-guns-dont-make-sense-it-was-his-administration-that-helped-make-them-available |title=Judge temporarily blocks posting of blueprints for 3D printed guns |website=National Post |date=2018-08-01 |access-date=2026-01-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260224120151/https://nationalpost.com/news/world/trump-now-says-3-d-printable-guns-dont-make-sense-it-was-his-administration-that-helped-make-them-available |archive-date=24 Feb 2026}}</ref> | ||
The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus brief in the Defense Distributed litigation arguing that "publishing computer files that communicate information, even in an esoteric format, is speech protected by the First Amendment."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/cases/defense-distributed-v-united-states-department-state |title=Defense Distributed v. United States Department of State |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=2026-01-21 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260123004840/https://www.eff.org/cases/defense-distributed-v-united-states-department-state |archive-date=23 Jan 2026}}</ref> | The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus brief in the Defense Distributed litigation arguing that "publishing computer files that communicate information, even in an esoteric format, is speech protected by the First Amendment."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/cases/defense-distributed-v-united-states-department-state |title=Defense Distributed v. United States Department of State |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation |access-date=2026-01-21 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260123004840/https://www.eff.org/cases/defense-distributed-v-united-states-department-state |archive-date=23 Jan 2026}}</ref> | ||