openmic.social is an uncensored community. You may encounter strong language, controversial opinions, and mature or NSFW material. You must be 18+ to browse. Illegal content is prohibited and removed on sight — please report it. By continuing, you accept that you may see content you personally disagree with.
Why would that be the case? If I’m a programmer in New York, or Germany, why do I care if my open-source browser meets California’s requirements? If there’s any chance of litigation, can’t you just slap “not for use in California” on it and call it a day?
Do you think California is the first and last place this will happen?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/first-of-its-kind-law-in-new-york-could-block-3d-printers-from-making-guns
Say the entire country of America bans 3d printers without DRM, why would a German 3D printing enthusiast stop developing their firmware?
Note that I’m not saying these bans aren’t bad. They certainly can and will cause harm to the community as a whole. But I don’t see the argument of, “if it gets banned in x place, it goes away forever, for everyone”. There are thousands of projects that are already illegal and exist without issue online. Piracy is illegal but still easily doable, it’s already illegal in several states to 3D print certain gun parts but people still create the files and print them out.
If that hobbyist is okay with it not being hosted on github or any other american infrastructure sure. And they have to hope EU laws dont follow suit. When GDPR passed, California adopted similar legislation. Why cant it happen in the reverse exactly? Its not like the EU wants 3d printed guns around. How will they be increasing gdp spend on defense if they allow their citizens to arm themselves cheaply and outside the authority of the state?
The EU already has considered laws banning gun stls. Why won’t it require drm again?