> If we legislate 3D printing to prevent weapon manufacture, we run directly counter to the idea of "Print anything you need at home!".
It's not necessary to refer specifically to the means of manufacture. Homemade weapons are already regulated. The legal risk you run by illegal possession is separate from how you obtained it.
> Is it desirable to require that 3D printers can recognize infringing mechanisms?
Again, a simpler question would be: "Is it necessary?" And the answer, of course, is no.
Seriously, this article is talking about completely hypothetical problems. There is plenty of time to legislate on 3d printing if and when it becomes a serious problem in and of itself.
It's not necessary to refer specifically to the means of manufacture. Homemade weapons are already regulated. The legal risk you run by illegal possession is separate from how you obtained it.
> Is it desirable to require that 3D printers can recognize infringing mechanisms?
Again, a simpler question would be: "Is it necessary?" And the answer, of course, is no.
Seriously, this article is talking about completely hypothetical problems. There is plenty of time to legislate on 3d printing if and when it becomes a serious problem in and of itself.