Brick Fight Posted June 8, 2015 Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 So I was struck by this big old guy being on TFB's front page: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/06/08/is-this-the-end-of-tfb/ So, I responded: That first excerpt is very misleading in its cut form. You really can't skip sentences in these types of releases. Here it is in its full form: "The proposed definition requires thatinformation be made available to thepublic without restrictions on its furtherdissemination. Any information thatmeets this definition is ‘‘publicdomain.’’ The definition also retains anexemplary list of information that hasbeen made available to the publicwithout restriction and would beconsidered ‘‘public domain.’’ Theseinclude magazines, periodicals andother publications available assubscriptions, publications contained inlibraries, information made available ata public conference, meeting, seminar,trade show, or exhibition, andinformation posted on public Web sites." That first sentence is important as far as your article goes. From what I can tell, this means that once even unapproved data is released into the "public domain", it can not be clamped down on. The following paragraphs talking about licenses for releasing data refer to "technical data" being released into the "public domain" without being submitted to review before being published into "defense articles." As it stands, "technical data" is approved information released to "defense articles", which as far as ITAR is concerned, is the United States Munitions List (a free article available online). Basically, they want to get a hold on what goes into the USML, and released to the public but if information bypasses the USML, it is public domain and cannot be suppressed by the government. This is no different from normal policy, but this is just a "re-clarification" sort of deal, a rote act in terms of government literature. The only thing I see here is that they want to make sure "technical data" gets approved before being released into the USML or to the public domain, and that "public domain" information not be suppressed. Once something is in the USML or released through official channels, dissemination of the information is not restricted. The punishment on releasing information without authentication I swear has been around for a long time, and is nothing new. It's tantamount to FDA regulations on preventing false advertising. The NRA response seems completely out of the blue, and full of scare tactics (i.e. an NRA press release). In the future, please look at these before scaring people. I've been an avid reader ever since Nathaniel told me he was writing for you guys, and I don't want this to turn into another blog full of scare tactics and angry "Obummer" rhetoric and commenting." Am I wrong in my objection, or am I misinformed in some way? I know it's definitely not "The end of TFB forever", but I'm just some twenty-something jackoff on the internet, too. I just always liked TFB because they don't spend their time riling up the "Obummer" crowd, and aims more at hobbyists, sportsmen, and enthusiasts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 8, 2015 Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 I figured we'd have an article on it. Surprised it ended up being posted by Steve. No idea what the actual deal is here. I'm staying out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 Yeah, I'm sorry if it comes off as passive-agressive or shitty to post it here. I didn't intend anything like that. I mostly am curious about how information gets relayed to publications more than anything right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 8, 2015 Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 I didn't feel it was passive-aggressive or bad in any way. Just responding to it.He probably saw the NRA's press release on it. I figured it was just typical OH MY GOD 6 BILLION ROUNDS DHS OBAMA stuff that gets released for attention reasons, and maybe Steve thought that too, and decided to post it anyway. Or he might actually believe it's a threat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.E. Watters Posted June 8, 2015 Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 In an era where forwarding an e-mail can be considered illegal smuggling, this doesn't surprise me.http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/6430 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 It's interesting to me because I've never run into the prospect of someone illegalizing my profession until lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 8, 2015 Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 Brick Fight, Any academic is familiar with public domain research rules. The public notice says that the Department of State will be reviewing its process for releasing information, not that it will be arresting people for discussing public-released information. This is the sort of nonsense the NRA plies to us lifetime members on a regular basis to get us to donate another thousand so the president can buy another mansion. File this along with the warnings about the post office buying hollow points and Obama's secret agenda to take guns. The following is important to remember: 1. The state department lacks any authority to regulate free speech inside of the United States, and can only affect you if you publish a very narrow band of classified information. AND - the most that agencies like State or the FBI will do, even if you are running around spilling secrets, is usually give you a phone call (leaving you to wonder how they got your cell phone). That happened to me before and it was not a cause of paranoia, but of great glee. I identified a North Korean transport of arms one time from watching a hobby website that posts pictures of the shipping industry, and spent ten minutes explaining how I did it. And the guy was really bored, like he has to ask me this stuff. 2. Obama is the democratic president who least cares about guns in the past 50 years. He scored a 0 in the Brady rankings. He will make some waves once in a while to get donations, but to someone scientifically minded I would worry not one bit that Obama is running wild taking guns. 3. I am sad to say since you all know him, but Mr. Johnson's response is a bit - weird. Jeeps_Guns_Tanks, Belesarius and Sturgeon 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virdea Posted June 8, 2015 Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 It's interesting to me because I've never run into the prospect of someone illegalizing my profession until lately. Well, I survived the ban on dogfighting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2015 Brick Fight, Any academic is familiar with public domain research rules. The public notice says that the Department of State will be reviewing its process for releasing information, not that it will be arresting people for discussing public-released information. This is the sort of nonsense the NRA plies to use lifetime members on a regular basis to get us to donate another thousand so the president can buy another mansion. That's what I'd assume (I'm getting a little combative in the comments with it). It really seems like a publication would only be in legal trouble if they were the immediate source of the leak, which means they're gaining their own information on un-released products and publishing them without a company's permission. That means it strikes me more as copy protection. On a positive note, I read the second entry of your series, Nate, and you have me hooked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 OK. Fess up. Who is who in the comments section? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I post under my FB profile, KevinHarron. BrickFight, if I'm not mistaken is Gary Allen, and has the top rated comment on the thread so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 OK. Fess up. Who is who in the comments section? 'Weesa all gonna die!' Really Don? LOLZ. Thanks for the giggle tho... I've had a rough few days. Donward 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 'Weesa all gonna die!' Really Don? LOLZ. Thanks for the giggle tho... I've had a rough few days. I have nothing to give but blood, sweat and trollz! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I post under my FB profile, KevinHarron. BrickFight, if I'm not mistaken is Gary Allen, and has the top rated comment on the thread so far. Greg, but whatever. Someone even did George, which are the two names people remember over my own in real life, too. Weird. Also, Phil is coming off as kind of a jerk. I guess they kind of wanted this for a while. edit: Lol, one guy wants me to sign an affadavit saying that I'm not an ATF agent or whatever, and Phil wants me to prepare a formalized apology for when he blows my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 Phil is coming off as more than a little panicky in the comments section. I'm really surprised at the tone of both the article and comments, and more than a little disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 Hey guys, that's my boss and my editor you're talking about, maybe show a bit more respect, yeah?You don't have to like what they're posting, but calling them retarded, really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 Yeah, I really don't want to shit where Baby eats, if you guys can stomach the metaphor. Yeah, but Bel, I don't think you'd want to be caught talking about your boss like that on the internet, so take it easy. Jeeps_Guns_Tanks and Sturgeon 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 Hey guys, that's my boss and my editor you're talking about, maybe show a bit more respect, yeah? You don't have to like what they're posting, but calling them retarded, really? I came off a little strong, but did you see the comment about Executive Orders? Seriously... Legit headdesked when I read that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I came off a little strong, but did you see the comment about Executive Orders? Seriously... Legit headdesked when I read that. I don't give a fuck what they said, Bel, you understand that, don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I'm sorry. Please feel free to delete this whole mess, and I'll never bring it up again. It's a pointless thread as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I edited my comment. Kinda forgot this was public area. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I'm sorry. Please feel free to delete this whole mess, and I'll never bring it up again. You're fine, Brick, sit down. I'm not gonna moderate this thread until I have to temp ban anybody. This is something we can handle just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I edited my comment. Kinda forgot this was public area. Sorry. Gratsi. Carry on, folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Fight Posted June 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I am interested who these "top people" he mentioned to me were. Without any names, it really comes off as the Nintendo Uncle defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 I am interested who these "top people" he mentioned to me were. Without any names, it really comes off as the Nintendo Uncle defense. Both Phil and Steve have connections to the industry, so it could be someone knowledgeable and informed. Or it could be Ted Nugent, I dunno. FWIW, while Obama himself doesn't seem to care about guns much, the people in his extended administration - especially in the upper echelons of the ATF - seem to be under the impression that it's their duty to make the most of the Obama presidency by fucking with gun owners as much as possible. Blaming all this on Barack himself is off, but it's not like nobody has any reason to be nervous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.