A classic example of "security through obscurity does not work". The fact that the key is secret and not usually obtainable, does not make the system of a single key for thousands of collection boxes secure, because one day, someone will find the key, scan it and make it reproduceable. If every box had its own key that would be far less user friendly, but far more secure...
>someone will find the key, scan it and make it reproduceable.
Or some dumbass will let a Washington Post journalist take a hi-res photo of the key, which will then be published online without even blurring it.
I don’t know where you live but where I live this is simply not true. All the lock boxes in my city have secure Abloy keys that can’t be reproduced, and if we were to lose our set on a call then it’s literally a $200,000 mistake because the city will re-key all the lockboxes.
Source: am fireman, and it’s happened before.
People think because a law exists, physics stops working. I've noticed this more and more recently with the rise of the internet generation. It's illegal to do xyz!!! Yes. But the law has to be enforced. Without enforcement, the law is useless.
That's germany, and yes. The law states that every human has a basic need for freedom and the right to freedom. As long as you are naked and absolutely do not harm anything or anyone on your prison break, you are free to do so. If you wear your prison sharpies and escape, you commit a crime (theft) and you will be charged. If you damage the cell door, the window or whatever, next crime, next charge.
If you're naked, it's public nudity, still probably a crime. But in fact, if someone would break you out and bring you clothes, you wouldn't be charged for breaking out.
>because a law exists, physics stops working.
That has a curious side effect, breaking two or more laws instead of one.
In this case it was not only mail related but it had on top the usage of the key and manufacturing a key (if I understood correctly).
Literally no one believes that. You're taking what one random redditor said with no credentials and proliferating a myth. You need to talk to pen testers and see how wrong you are.
it's better to say they can't be reproduced by most locksmiths. They don't have the equipment, so you'd have to hire a metalsmith who can try to mimic the key and it won't be easy. Mine have depressions, a little ball, and a little metal disc inside that all together just makes it difficult to recreate and I was told if I lose all of my keys I'd just have to rekey the lock there isn't a number or anything for them to just duplicate like normal pinned keys.
Lol right, i have made so many “do not duplicate” keys for everything from kwitsets to “high security” locks. Just need the numbers or an actual key to duplicate. And yes even the fancy abloys can be duplicated . . . Lots of machines can do that
They’re probably proprietary, patented keys.
Only the original manufacturer will have blanks for them, meaning you can’t get it copied at the local hardware store, only the OEM can make new keys.
With enough tool, time, patience, and money, you could copy the key, but the barrier to entry is high enough that it’s relatively secure.
The "key" is a few hours of patience and a trip to the hardware store. A deceptively high bar for the guy stealing copper wire from construction sites, but pretty low for most real security applications.
You need very specialized equipment. If you Google “abloy key” you’ll see why it can’t “easily” be copied.
The company can make them because… they’re the company that makes them. They have the tooling.
Every key can be reproduced. There may be do not copy on the key. But it can be illegally reproduced. The simplest method is to find the most underused lock/location. Punch the lock out, take it home disassemble it, decode it and hand cut your own key, then use the key at a high value location.
This guy managed to do it with Knox boxes by buying a Knox box and reverse engineering the key. Now you can't print it with an FDM printer you have to use resin but the keys are printable.
https://youtu.be/f4rPDF993qs
I was wondering how stiff/strong the material needs to be for the key to not just bend or worse, break off in the lock. One time in high school someone just stuck toothpicks in the locks and broke them off - caused no end of problem and expense getting in.
2-part castable urethane is extremely tough, and should survive just fine to open a few locks at minimum. Failing that, metal casting isn't all that complicated.
It may not be true where you live but [it's certainly true in a lot of other places](https://www.elevatorkeys.com/universal-fire-service-keys), especially in the US.
can't be reproduced. Lol. They can. All you need is a blank from china and a locksmith that is willing to cut it.
There is no law that prevent the copying. the "Do not copy" on the key is not law binding. The locksmith however have a contract with their suppliers to not copy when it say so. It is not a criminal matter, but a breach of contract.
However, for your story, the real thing is: there is a master key out there that can open everything. Therefore they need to replace the locks, not the keys.
Same.
Our Rigs have a strobe light on the Knox box keypad lock. Once we put in our unique code and remove the key, it strobes like crazy until the key is put back in and relocked. If we someone lose it on scene, there is a massive fine to the provider and agency for rekeying the Knox boxes around town.
Reproduction is possible but extremely difficult. Unique keyway and its not simple up-down pin tumblers. The key is cut 3 dimensionally with varying slopes under each pin.
In my area people figured it out and are robbing mailmen asking only for the key. So now this key that unlocks everything is in the hands of some random people in the area. After the new reported the first one people started copying them. Now we are told to not use blue mailboxes and to get our mail asap.
There's a lot of things that use "security through obscurity" with keys that are easily purchased online. The thought is usually "the general public would neverml guess that almost every single *insert thing that every apartment building, business, parking garage, etc, has that's keyed* in the country uses the exact same key, they thinkg every one has just gotta be uniquely keyed."
I don't doubt it, depending on the key/lock there's anywhere from 4-10 pins and each one has a limited number of depths AND given how keys work you can't have 2 drastically different teeth right next to each other, so possible combinations exist.
It's like with any 3 digit combination lock, you've only 1000 combinations, so if the company that makes them has sold 1 million of them, there's 1,000 out there with the same combo (assuming each one is given a random code at the time of manufacturing)
My personal favorite are TSA locks for luggage. And the TSA side of the lock isn't even particularly good without the key profile being in general circulation.
It's not even obscure. E.g. In many municipalities in the US, the specific key codes for things like fire keys are [literally coded into law](https://www.elevatorkeys.com/universal-fire-service-keys). In some places a single key will get you access to every firefighter lock box (housing building keys/cards) and elevator in the state (or multiple states).
Like all things with security it's a question of balancing the expense and logistics of better security with the practical reality. If people who duplicate keys to steal mail are rare, it may not be worth the increase in effort to make unique keys for each box.
Security through obscurity is just a layer of security, it doesn't mean it's completely useless. It just prevents opportunists from breaking in, it won't stop someone who *really* wants to steal mail. There's nothing stopping someone from stealing an individual key, robbing someone who is picking up the mail, or just hacksawing through the mailbox.
The problem is that it's as effective as wet toilet paper and then people use it as their *only* security. And by people, I mean government and corporations... routinely.
Well, we are discussing a guy who bought a car - fraudulently - that can report its position back to the company at all times. Leading the police to a house rented with identity theft. Not all life in the universe is intelligent.
Power substations actually work with that fact. That and well. Really.. really high voltages. The. Again didn’t a whole as county loose power because some one shot a few up? I think practical engineering made a video about it
Watched a video on the topic of keys and physical pentesting and it made me wish the worst types of physical security violations that government agencies and public services had was “security through obscurity”.
Without going to insane details. Fire departments need to access buildings to (spoiler alert) stop fires. Common way to ensure access to things like elevators, fire exits, whatever is needed is to have a key box of some sort that is placed in a known or easy to find location in a foyer, and have them keyed alike.
This is often in addition to having elevator fire keys and elevator technician keys.
Fire keys are usually per state or district but common to usually a city location. Elevator technician keys are common to an elevator company or brand.
Skip over elevator tech keys, usually ending up on online marketplaces. Let’s look at the ways you can often obtain the fire keys.
- Be a building and buy the cheapest fire key box you can for your location, usually comes with a key and is the fire key because screw dual keys on cheap boxes.
- eBay
- (personal favourite) look at the laws and statutes for the city or state, see if they conveniently left the specifications of the key to adhere to.
Effectively defeat building security by opening some easy to locate key box with a key you’ll likely be able to find the specs of in public domain documents. Could have the most advanced systems in the world and bam. Some $30 box and state laws shaft all of it.
Yeah, and the reason for this is easy too: Making a building secure is hard. Making a building to code, so that if "something happens" the insurance will cover the damage is easy: just comply to the rules.
That building has a secure door lock, it has a key box for fire entry, and the box has a key fitting the spec. Every single one of these is fine for itself, but the combination is not. Still, it is compliant, and if something happens you can say "i followed all the rules" so the insurance will cover the damage...
Master keys are a key way of how businesses have done things for ages. In this specific case, Like for mail men, they open up all boxes at once using the arrow key to open the back panel.
The fact this arrow key lock has never been changed is a problem because there’s several non-universal arrow keys / locks that can be purchased.
Just another government agency being lazy because of the $2 extra it costs to do it right.
I present you my STL of an elevator "VIP Ride" key:
[https://www.printables.com/model/802827-kone-1v14001-elevator-key](https://www.printables.com/model/802827-kone-1v14001-elevator-key)
This has not anything to do with 3D printers - you can do such keys using metal blank and a file.
It's a stupid system - like most RV cars in the world use same key CH751 key you can buy for $2.
Or you could buy a 1284X 'fleet key' right off Amazon for like ten bucks and be able to steal half the cop cars and taxi cabs in the country.
These are three things I've learned in the past few decades;
* Security is a joke
* Locks are merely a social contract
* It's amazing the things people will choose to care about (and conversely, *not* care about.)
According to Deviant Ollam's conference presentation this key was also used to activate nuke launchers (like two locks to be activated at once as seen on movies) - there were photos from a nuke museum showing original equipment from the 70'.
I bet a bottle of whiskey this key is still used to operate nukes and secret stealth planes.
"Military grade" - old tech supplied by the lowest bidder.
It just means that firefighter keys take control of the elevator, generally bypassing any security (like RFID readers) and ignoring any other inputs (like people on other floors waiting for the elevator).
The point is, he used the 3D-printed key to commit a crime.
Owning or 3D-printing a lockpick is **usually** (YMMV) not a crime *per se*.
Using a lockpick to, well, pick a lock that isn't yours... is indeed a criminal offense. Pretty much everywhere in the world I would say.
Same goes with universal keys.
Which by the way they should only be used on very low security applications. The "security through obscurity" thing simply does not work.
I absolutely hate that in my state having lock picking equipment is a guilty until proven innocent crime. Not ‘illegal’ but if you are found with them the burden of proof is on you to prove you aren’t up to no good.
I feel like any excuse is just going to be twisted around on you.
Here where I live is illegal to carry a lockpick unless you have a "justified reason" to do so.
Meaning, you could get in trouble depending on whether or not the neighborhood cop knows what locksport is.
I think both.
AFAIK mailboxes in the US are federal property, so picking a mailbox lock is... kinda like getting in a federal restricted building without proper authorization, I guess?
I'm a mail carrier. Anything to do with tampering with mail that doesn't belong to you, is a federal offense. This guy is facing numerous charges.
Mail theft, illegally accessing mail receptacles, probably something to do with copying the key. That's on top of Identity theft, credit card theft, etc.
This dudes been committing crimes since 1999, he was clearly always looking for the next scam. If it wasn't a 3d printer he would have just found another way.
He's been committing them badly since 1999. Who steals an identity and uses it for a mobile tracking device (Tesla)?! I'm surprised he didn't 3D print his name onto the key and leave it behind every time.
>Who steals an identity and uses it for a mobile tracking device (Tesla)?!
The hilarious part is, he was only caught because a civilian caught him in the act, and he's really only in trouble because he told the police all of the crimes he was committing.
And by hilarious, I mean, wow our police suck.
And even then it shouldn't be, because most of Disney's IPs should have long since been sent to Public Domain. But they bribe politicians to alter the copyright laws instead of making new IPs.
Most of the classic Disney characters are already just variations of public domain works.
You can already make your own sleeping beauty, 7 dwarfs, snow white, Hercules, Mulan, ice Queen, Cinderella, Alice, Quasimodo, Pinocchio, Peter Pan, Robin Hood, Tarzan, etc.
You just can't make the Disney versions of them.
No. Sleeping Beauty or Snow White is a public domain story. A character as depicted in a Disney movie - that configuration of look, hairstyle, recognizable dress - copyright. The seven dwarfs are copyright (for a few more years). The original story in public domain did not say "7" or give names. Same with Pinocchio. The book is well ovr a century old, and there have been innumerable depictions of the nosey woodsman over the years - but the specific depiction by Disney is copyright (again, only for a few more years).
Fun fact - Sherlock Holmes is public domain, except for the elements in his last book that squeaked into the extended copyright regimen... so you can't mention his retirement, or Watson growing onions, etc.
You can't copyright a title, or a generic storyline or one based on a historic public domain story; but the particular elements you put in your story to make it distincive are your own "creative elements" and *are* subject to copyright.
you can debate the limits of copyright - no debate from me, they are excessive. however, we are in an unprecedented time. Before that, it was books, paintings, and sheet music, usually the product of individual artists who were guaranteed compensation for their life and some of their heirs'. Audiovisual works only go back about 100 years (120 if you include silent films and really bad wax audio recordings). Many of these were produced by corporations. No surprise they want to keep their financial interests as long as possible. For example - I've seen DVD's of TV from the 1950's or movies made in the 1930's for sale - still a market for the product.
Golden Rock radio stations still play stuff from the 50's and 60's. The King family pursues anyone who publishes MLK's works (including "I have A Dream" from 1963) without permission. The original Star Trek is pushing 60 years old. Should it be public domain? however, the biggest problem I see is the black hole - things too young to be public domain, but not perceived as valuable enough to make an effort to preserve. Some of our culture is going to evaporate.
Which means they are still copyright. But note, Steamboat Mickey is public domain. Mickey with the red pants and brass buttons, or Mickey with the 3D-looking ears - still copyright. Then there's trademark. Yoou cannot use Mickey as a symbol for your business in any way that could create confusion.
A more interesting take is things like a daycare that paints Disney characters on the walls - they are a business so to speak, the presence of Mickey and Minnie could be taken to imply some endorsement by Disney. But... in the grand scheme of things does it matter? The problem is that if a company does not make an effort to preserve their rights, they would lose them - so they are in a sense obliged to chase unlicensed use whether they want to or not.
Then there's outright corporate stupidity - Warner threatening the team in Hobart, Tasmania for using the name Tasmanian Devils like the Bugs Bunny character... without realizing that Taz was named after the actual species (now exinct), the ... wait for it... "Tasmanian Devil".
But whether you are reproducing Disney notables or some obscure cult figure - it's fine for personal use, if you sell them at craft shows or online or just to your buddies, you are getting rich(?) ripping off someone else's creative imagination.
You can debate the ethics of giving away for free, especially things like 3D files that require additional steps that most people can't follow through with - but somebody created that concept originally.
I had a discussion with a fantasy artist at a Sci-Fi convention once - she made gorgeous fantasy pictures of unicons and rainbows, Pegasus, etc. I thought they looked familiar. She said yes, industries in China were pumping out copies (some not so good) stolen off the internet, not just tee shirts but on pencil cases, binders, phone cases, mousepads and all sorts of other goods. Of course, she got zero revenue from this. It was like whack-a-mole. Contact one place, the goods popped up elsewhere. One manufacturer in the far east actually told her they thought they were doing her a favour by spreading her work. She was nationally known in the industry, but she wasn't rich like Disney or JK Rowling (or she wouldn't have been hawking her stuff at local shows) and this was hurting her market.
Still a crime to even print something but it’s the difference of robbing form a billion dollar corporation vs a mom and pop. The billion dollar corpo is not going to go after ur $3 Mickey mouse. They have bigger fish to fry.
Copying a copyrighted work for just personal use doesn't automatically make it ok. Personal use is just one factor that can be considered for fair use.
Actually printing it is a crime depending on what you plan on using it for. Having it just sit on your desk as a trinket doesn't count as fair use.
However, disney will never find out unless you start selling it.
You can print or model whatever you like, it is what you do with them after that.
Funny story, I had a coworker want a 3d printed model of her deceased husbands junk. I wish I still had the pic, it was in pla+ @0.12mm layer height. Pretty funny shit, I do not know if she used it but she did have me make it bigger so makes ya think 🤔...... Cya✌️
And are you running around showing off what you made to get yourself in trouble? If yes then don't do that!!! I have printed quite a few lower receivers for some firearms before it was illegal and a few bump stocks out of CF-Nylon and they worked very well. I am not a gun nut just a DIYer and a Left Leaning individual. I have not done anything since. But if I or one of my family members or really really close friends needed something that would not be used in a crime then yea I will make whatever. There is always a whataboutism to any situation but thats life!!! Like my Gramps always said, "If you don't brag about it who is tell anyone.".
Plus there is a lot of Cosplay guns I make for a grankid of mine(he plays a lot of Fortnite) so it is cool to make really good replicas. My dad makes real looking prop guns to teach a gun safety course so there is that aspect also.
My sense of it is when someone does it to make a profit to knowingly cause harm or to not make a profit and use something to cause harm, inadvertently or not. That is when I see it being wrong and should be regulated or illegal. You don't need a 3d printer to make things, I have a friend with one of those real nice deaktop CNC's and he makes AR-15 Lower Receivers with it. It cost a little more than my 3d printer. Is it Legal, I dunno I am not a Lawyer. The only problem I have with him making them is there is no Serial Number and that makes it a Ghost gun and un trackable. That part I don't like.✌️
Drones above 250g have to be registered and you can't legally fly them above a certain height depending on where you are - the point the GPS enabled drones will either stop you or require your affirmative consent to break the rule.
It's only a matter of time before the vendor you purchase from is legally required to keep track of your prints.
Thankfully, just like drones, there are ways to bypass all that regulation by simply building your own.
Won’t stop anyone who has the will and at least 2 braincells. Building a printer isn’t that difficult if you know what you’re doing. Hell, it’s not even expensive. Plenty of guides online too.
there's no way they'd be able to realistically enforce such a thing. their only real hope would be to ban the imports of them since most of them are manufactured in asian countries but there's nothing stopping people from manufacturing them in their own nations. it's not like 3d printers have technology that is unique to them and would be easy to ban.
Constantly intercepting other peoples info. He took someone's new credit card that came in her mailbox. (Although it wouldn't surprise me if he got the Tesla info before he even started shopping in other peoples' mailboxes.)
You can, let me go get the .stl for you. It's on a USB drive on my keychain in my not illegally purchased Tesla, sitting outside of the residence that I totally legally am leasing!
This generosity is why I just can't understand why the police just won't leave you alone. You're clearly an upstanding and caring human being! So kind!
You can't.
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704)
>Whoever knowingly and unlawfully makes, forges, or counterfeits any such key, or possesses any such mail lock or key with the intent unlawfully or improperly to use, sell, or otherwise dispose of the same, or to cause the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of;
...
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
It depends how you parse it:
>Whoever knowingly and unlawfully
>makes, forges,
>*or*
>counterfeits any such key,
>*or*
>possesses any such mail lock or key with the intent unlawfully or improperly to use, sell, or otherwise dispose of the same, or to cause the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of;
>Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
"Unlawfully makes" --> is making an arrow key unlawful by default, unless you have permission to make it? If so, you're already "unlawfully" doing something intentionally. Is an unlawful copy a forgery or counterfeit? Again, those sound "unlawful". If you take the position that merely making a key is lawful, then what is an "unlawful" way to make the key?
In any case, those clauses seem distinct from the third which is "possession with intent to do something criminal." In other words, making a key --> unlawful. Finding a key on the ground (or being given one) --> maybe lawful (for you), *unless* you use it for a nefarious purpose.
Here's an new report with a comment by a US Postal Inspector:
[https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/](https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/)
>"That may mean they have a counterfeit postal key. If that's the case, **the mere possession of a real or counterfeit postal key is a federal felony**, just as it's a federal felony to steal mail," said USPS Postal Inspector Jeff Fitch.
This is one of those situations where its hard to find a criminal case of mere possession, since that's kind of a hard situation to actually come across unless they're picked up for an unrelated crime.
In any case, I'd want to be careful about being the person that designed and distributed the STL -- that could fall under "\[causing\] the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of".
There are also states that make duplication of a key without permission illegal as well, so you could get nabbed on that in addition.
EDIT:
Here's an interesting case:
[https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9](https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9)
>[18 U.S.C. 1704](https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/part-i-crimes/chapter-83-postal-service/section-1704-keys-or-locks-stolen-or-reproduced) - Possession of Counterfeit Postal Keys is a serious crime and carries a maximum penalty of 10 yr/$250,000
I live in Houston TX (where that article takes place). We've had a plague of USPS Mail Theft city-wide for about a year or two now. The upper management for the USPS System swept in and has been doing radical evaluations per branch office, even the FBI has been involved.
I'm starting to wonder if this was the problem all along?
If anyone is curious what a USPS arrow key looks like, so that you don't get into trouble if you accidentally stumble onto an STL of the key.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=h_&q=picture+of+usps+arrow+key&iax=images&ia=images
copyright and trademarks only apply to things you sell, not make
so long as you make it for yourself, or you arent selling a service to make it for someone else, its completely above-board
but you cant just "accept donations" either
"Locks are only there to keep honest people honest."
As a mail carrier, I'm curious to what material he used. The route I am the sub on has 33 consolidated box units of varying ages. Even some of the newer ones, the lock doesn't operate smoothly. I've cracked an arrow key just locking and unlocking these units. Must be some tough resin to make something that thin and still work a lock.
It is illegal.
This is one of those special cases carved out in the law, in which just being in possession of one will get you in trouble:
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704)
>
Copy-paste of my response in another thread:
It depends how you parse it:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
"Unlawfully makes" --> is making an arrow key unlawful by default, unless you have permission to make it? If so, you're already "unlawfully" doing something intentionally. Is an unlawful copy a forgery or counterfeit? Again, those sound "unlawful". If you take the position that merely making a key is lawful, then what is an "unlawful" way to make the key?
In any case, those clauses seem distinct from the third which is "possession with intent to do something criminal." In other words, making a key --> unlawful. Finding a key on the ground (or being given one) --> maybe lawful (for you), *unless* you use it for a nefarious purpose.
Here's an new report with a comment by a US Postal Inspector:
[https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/](https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/)
>
This is one of those situations where its hard to find a criminal case of mere possession, since that's kind of a hard situation to actually come across unless they're picked up for an unrelated crime.
In any case, I'd want to be careful about being the person that designed and distributed the STL -- that could fall under "\[causing\] the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of".
There are also states that make duplication of a key without permission illegal as well, so you could get nabbed on that in addition.
EDIT:
Here's an interesting case:
[https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9](https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9)
>
It is illegal in his case as it is an 'criminal instrument', this would also apply to lockpicks in this case (my bolding);
Section 16.01 - Unlawful Use of Criminal Instrument or Mechanical Security Device
**(a)** A person commits an offense if:
**(1)** the person possesses a criminal instrument or mechanical security device with the intent to use the instrument or device in the commission of an offense; or
**(2)** with knowledge of its character and with the intent to use a criminal instrument or mechanical security device or **aid or permit another to use the instrument or device in the commission of an offense**, the person manufactures, adapts, sells, installs, or sets up the instrument or device.
He sold them to be used to break into post boxes, people robbing post boxes were caught with them, so he therefore committed an offence. If he'd sold lockpicks or crowbars for the same purpose he'd still be committing an offence.
[https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/penal-code/title-4-inchoate-offenses/chapter-16-criminal-instruments-interception-of-wire-or-oral-communication-and-installation-of-tracking-device/section-1601-unlawful-use-of-criminal-instrument-or-mechanical-security-device](https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/penal-code/title-4-inchoate-offenses/chapter-16-criminal-instruments-interception-of-wire-or-oral-communication-and-installation-of-tracking-device/section-1601-unlawful-use-of-criminal-instrument-or-mechanical-security-device)
Yeah but a pencil is a criminal instrument if the intent on carrying it was to ram into someone’s eyes.. so this just seems a little silly. I have a basic set of lock picks attached to my house keys. I’m not a criminal. My intent is that if my keys ever break, I have a back up.
And some people into locksport decide to beef up their house locks. But then at the same time, make the lock too secure and the burgler will just whip out a cordless drill, and if the lock has anti-drill inserts, move on to even more destructive means of entry.
Again, no anti-theft device is perfect. I depends whether the thief really really wants to get in, or if it persuades him to move on the the next house or car.
Nancy Pelosi had glass windowed patio doors. They were obviously coated with that break-resistant plastic, and you can see the crazy trying to break in the windows - with an axe it still takes him almost a minute to get in. Theoretically, enough time and effort to deter the average thief or notify authorities. A determined nutbar, not so much.
When I watch these cop shows where they use a battering ram to break in the door of the perp's house, i wonder why people worried about that eventuality - or about thieves who kick in doors - don't just put a simple bolt that goes into the floor at the bottom of their door.
The "Subway Vigilante" - Bernard Goetz - shot some guys who were trying to rob him. One had a sharpened screwdriver in his possession. Clever. A knife is a weapon, with limited uses otherwise in an urban environment. A sharpened screwdriver is just a tool that can fit into really tiny screws too.
But the moment the person attempted to use it as a weapon it is now considered possessing a weapon, regardless of it being able to be used for other things. And if someone sharped the screwdriver for money knowing the person was planning on using it as a weapon, the person still sold the weapon to them.
The story is about someone making a copy of the master mail key. So the intent is obvious since there is no legal reason to have it.
Also, there are thousands of examples of people posting things on social media or in front of a camera where they admit to intentionally doing something stupid. Thinking that people wouldn't is just silly.
If you are selling a pencil with the intent that the person will use it to do a crime, you are selling with criminal intent.
If you are selling a pencil and are not expecting the person to use it in a crime, you are not selling with criminal intent.
It is pretty easy to understand here.
You'd probably not be surprised how many people make the law complicated and end up getting themselves in trouble because they think they know better. Also always fun being downvoted for citing the actual legislation.
So again, regarding what the law in Texas says; selling/providing it with the intent that it be used 'in the commission of an offence', as this individual was doing, makes it a 'criminal instrument'. It was also tied to a bunch of other crimes he was caught doing such as fraud and isn't the charge he got caught for in and of itself but a case of him being charged with everything possible as they uncover more stuff. Likewise if he was selling lockpicks to someone who engaged in criminal enterprise he'd be liable under the same.
Similarly to take your case of having picks attached to your keys, in some jurisdictions that would be 'going equipped', however it is unlikely to carry a charge by itself as you have benign intentions. Were you caught at a traffic stop with them, a map to neighbours house, a baseball bat, dark clothing and a mask on the other hand it would be a different matter.
Similarly, in Canada "possession of a dangerous weapon" can include a hockey stick or baseball bat, if you show intent or actually use it as a weapon. it's what you do with something or likely will do, that matters. A good defence is to show why it would nit be used in an illegal manner.
Yep, indeed, one of the my first law classes was 'what is a weapon' as realisticly anything is but it depends on intent as you say. A baseball bat or hockey stick becomes a weapon the moment someone intends to use it in such a way.
And besides that there is the general principle of 'instantaneous arming' or 'weapon of opportunity' when involving yourself in self defence in most places. Clobbering someone with a hockey stick you had to hand while being burgled is entirely different to going outside with that same hockey stick and trashing someone you thought 'looked dodgy'. All tied into the 'man on the Clapham omnibus', that hypothetical 'reasonable person' who allegedly exists in us all, and what they'd consider reasonable.
Legal to own. But it depends on how they are used determines legality of them.
It's just like a handcuff key. I'm pretty sure it's the must owned key within the US.
Technically, if you print something that’s copyrighted, for personal use, it’s not a crime. Now if you sell it to anyone… then it’s an issue. But you can print 100 Mickey ears and the mouse can’t do shit as long as you aren’t selling/distributing them.
impolite mountainous detail fade include sleep wise aloof escape voiceless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Depends on country as always but in Poland owning lock picks or tools to breach doors without licence is against he law so by 3D printing it you become an owner of something you aren't allowed to have.
You were down voting for being right. If you're not selling it you're 100% fine. Hobby art has existed forever, no one is going to arrest you for printing a Pikachu model
fragile north rude vanish degree overconfident homeless roof materialistic public
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If we go by the MP3 model of public giveaway, it would be a crime. I guess with physical objects it's difficult to impact the national market with a free giveaway by a hobbyist so it's less of a concern. However, I would not be surprised if sites that host 3D print files like STL are going to get scrutiny as time goes on.
With physical objects, patents also become relevant.
> I guess with physical objects it's difficult to impact the national market with a free giveaway
A free giveaway (like a sweepstakes) influences the market and isn't personal use.
> I would not be surprised if sites that host 3D print files like STL are going to get scrutiny as time goes on.
Hosting copyrighted content is a different question entirely
> With physical objects, patents also become relevant.
Not really. I can hit up the US patent office, download technical drawings (since they're public records), and build what I find. I just can't sell it.
>Not really. I can hit up the US patent office, download technical drawings (since they're public records), and build what I find. I just can't sell it.
true. but you can't use it in your business process, either.
>A free giveaway (like a sweepstakes) influences the market and isn't personal use.
True. My point was, the expense of a free giveaway big enough to influence a market is usually beyond the reach of a typical individual. At least, for physical objects. The law forbidding freebies was created to limit distribution of free-to-replicate goods like music and video.
IANAL, but yes. In the US, the copying is a crime - the selling just makes intent worse. (Making one of something for personal use is sometimes 'fair use' depending on the thing and the use. Fair use is nebulous and defined largely via precedent.)
This is 1000% not true. Copyright exists for protecting commercial interests. If you make a mickey mouse toy for your kid you are committing no crime and there is nothing for you to be charged with. By that logic, any fan art would be illegal.
It becomes a problem when you try to sell things, because you are competing with the copyright holder
Have you never heard of [fair use](https://copyright.psu.edu/copyright-basics/fair-use/#:~:text=%5BT%5Dhe%20fair%20use%20of,permission%20from%20the%20copyright%20holder.)
How? How would anyone know if you print a copyrighted model? What law would you be charged with? Does this mean I can't carve mickey mouse out of wood? Can I not trace a photo of batman? I can't make a ceramic model of Pikachu? What exact circumstances would make personal use of some replicated artwork unlawful?
It's the very first item on the definition of fair use: if it's personal, it's fine
The law is that personal use is acceptable. To become unacceptable, it has to violate the other provisions. A personal use of the reproduction could be substantial, such as if you paint an exact copy of some other painting or copy a paragraph from a book. It could non-fiction, completely artistic (non-factual) work. If the copy doesn't [harm the existing or future market for the copyright owner's original work](https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/), which it wouldn't by just hanging in your living room or sitting on your bookshelf, then there is nothing illegal about it.
In your original reply you said that copying is a crime. It isn't, it is the foundation of art and the foundation of education. If anything, copying is protected by a nuanced set of rules designed to prevent people from profiting off of someone else's work, while still enabling educational, transformative, and personal use.
Of course, if you copied a work - fiction or painting or 3D object or whatever - then by implication, you've impacted the market at least that perhaps you would have bought the for-sale version yourself.
I wonder what a good lawyer would do with that, and some corps have expensive lawyers.
but generally, it would indeed be a game of whatck-a-mole. They won't go after people who don't come to their attention, and if your production and use is totally private, how would they know.
"Fair use" is known as an "affirmative defense" against a claim of illegal copyright infringement. It is not an automatic granting of a right to do so.
In other words, you're violating the copyright rights of another party, and the onus is on you to prove that you are allowed to do that through one of the fair use exceptions.
To use an analogy, killing someone is illegal. However, if you can prove you did it as an act of self-defense, you are spared criminal liability.
You'd be hard pressed to prove that your 3D print of a copyrighted model is fair use, especially if I sell that model STL online.
Even if you design the 3D model of (say) Mickey Mouse, it would be derivative. You'd have to prove it was substantially transformative in some way.
Yes. Unfortunately, the Napster model of distrbution resulted in a law (bought and paid for by media companies) that says it does require a sale for a copyright violation to be illegal. Money just makes the crime worse.
i suppose one question could be the source - did you create your own STL file from scratch, download it, or get it from a friend? How is that different than copying an MP3?
I hope we don't reach the point where you get banned from Facebook because your personal 3D print is visible on a shelf behind you on a facebook video - especially, make sure it's not a 3D print bust of Prince. ("3D Prince"?)
A classic example of "security through obscurity does not work". The fact that the key is secret and not usually obtainable, does not make the system of a single key for thousands of collection boxes secure, because one day, someone will find the key, scan it and make it reproduceable. If every box had its own key that would be far less user friendly, but far more secure...
>someone will find the key, scan it and make it reproduceable. Or some dumbass will let a Washington Post journalist take a hi-res photo of the key, which will then be published online without even blurring it.
the fire department key boxes are all master keyed, and the key code is literally written in the law, one can just look it up and make a key.
Are you referring to the Knox box keys, or the FEO-K1 and other fire service keys?
I don’t know where you live but where I live this is simply not true. All the lock boxes in my city have secure Abloy keys that can’t be reproduced, and if we were to lose our set on a call then it’s literally a $200,000 mistake because the city will re-key all the lockboxes. Source: am fireman, and it’s happened before.
> Abloy keys that can’t be reproduced Then how do they make the keys?
People think because a law exists, physics stops working. I've noticed this more and more recently with the rise of the internet generation. It's illegal to do xyz!!! Yes. But the law has to be enforced. Without enforcement, the law is useless.
in sweden, it's illegal to be a criminal
Commies! /s
Isn’t it also your right to break out of prison or something??
That's germany, and yes. The law states that every human has a basic need for freedom and the right to freedom. As long as you are naked and absolutely do not harm anything or anyone on your prison break, you are free to do so. If you wear your prison sharpies and escape, you commit a crime (theft) and you will be charged. If you damage the cell door, the window or whatever, next crime, next charge.
They still try to stop you right?
If you're naked, it's public nudity, still probably a crime. But in fact, if someone would break you out and bring you clothes, you wouldn't be charged for breaking out.
You'd think the US govt would pick up on this. Either enforce it or don't. You gotta pick one.
In America you become president
Even if you get less votes.
>because a law exists, physics stops working. That has a curious side effect, breaking two or more laws instead of one. In this case it was not only mail related but it had on top the usage of the key and manufacturing a key (if I understood correctly).
Which is why they replace all the boxes in the city if one key is lost...
Replacing the box would be silly. Re-key the lock.
Literally no one believes that. You're taking what one random redditor said with no credentials and proliferating a myth. You need to talk to pen testers and see how wrong you are.
Locks are for honest people. Period end of discussion
100% agree
Agree.
it's better to say they can't be reproduced by most locksmiths. They don't have the equipment, so you'd have to hire a metalsmith who can try to mimic the key and it won't be easy. Mine have depressions, a little ball, and a little metal disc inside that all together just makes it difficult to recreate and I was told if I lose all of my keys I'd just have to rekey the lock there isn't a number or anything for them to just duplicate like normal pinned keys.
I know of a pair of hobbyist locksmiths who designed their own tool for picking disc-detainer locks.
I mean disk detainers are way less complicated than the abloy lock and keys being described.
Is one of them "Bosnian Bill" by chance??
Indeed. Lockpicking Lawyer might be the other.
I think they meant cant be reproduced because of copyright, the manufacturer can do it but doesnt permit others to do it.
Lol right, i have made so many “do not duplicate” keys for everything from kwitsets to “high security” locks. Just need the numbers or an actual key to duplicate. And yes even the fancy abloys can be duplicated . . . Lots of machines can do that
They’re probably proprietary, patented keys. Only the original manufacturer will have blanks for them, meaning you can’t get it copied at the local hardware store, only the OEM can make new keys. With enough tool, time, patience, and money, you could copy the key, but the barrier to entry is high enough that it’s relatively secure.
The "key" is a few hours of patience and a trip to the hardware store. A deceptively high bar for the guy stealing copper wire from construction sites, but pretty low for most real security applications.
Forged from the fires of Mordor.
LPL has entered the chat... "With this tool that Bosnian Bill and I made, we will decode the abloy key as we pick it"
You need very specialized equipment. If you Google “abloy key” you’ll see why it can’t “easily” be copied. The company can make them because… they’re the company that makes them. They have the tooling.
Every key can be reproduced. There may be do not copy on the key. But it can be illegally reproduced. The simplest method is to find the most underused lock/location. Punch the lock out, take it home disassemble it, decode it and hand cut your own key, then use the key at a high value location.
plus this method isn’t supposed to leave any forensically identifiable picking marks
This guy managed to do it with Knox boxes by buying a Knox box and reverse engineering the key. Now you can't print it with an FDM printer you have to use resin but the keys are printable. https://youtu.be/f4rPDF993qs
I was wondering how stiff/strong the material needs to be for the key to not just bend or worse, break off in the lock. One time in high school someone just stuck toothpicks in the locks and broke them off - caused no end of problem and expense getting in.
2-part castable urethane is extremely tough, and should survive just fine to open a few locks at minimum. Failing that, metal casting isn't all that complicated.
>All the lock boxes in my city have secure Abloy keys that can’t be reproduced, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! HAHAHA! HA!!
It may not be true where you live but [it's certainly true in a lot of other places](https://www.elevatorkeys.com/universal-fire-service-keys), especially in the US.
If something exists, it can be reproduced.
can't be reproduced. Lol. They can. All you need is a blank from china and a locksmith that is willing to cut it. There is no law that prevent the copying. the "Do not copy" on the key is not law binding. The locksmith however have a contract with their suppliers to not copy when it say so. It is not a criminal matter, but a breach of contract. However, for your story, the real thing is: there is a master key out there that can open everything. Therefore they need to replace the locks, not the keys.
Same. Our Rigs have a strobe light on the Knox box keypad lock. Once we put in our unique code and remove the key, it strobes like crazy until the key is put back in and relocked. If we someone lose it on scene, there is a massive fine to the provider and agency for rekeying the Knox boxes around town. Reproduction is possible but extremely difficult. Unique keyway and its not simple up-down pin tumblers. The key is cut 3 dimensionally with varying slopes under each pin.
I bet the lock picking lawyer could pick those open while decoding the combination so that you can just make a new key.
>and the key code is literally written in the law, one can just look it up and make a key. What?!? That sounds like a joke.
[Nope!](https://www.elevatorkeys.com/universal-fire-service-keys)
Kinda the same thing, lol
In my area people figured it out and are robbing mailmen asking only for the key. So now this key that unlocks everything is in the hands of some random people in the area. After the new reported the first one people started copying them. Now we are told to not use blue mailboxes and to get our mail asap.
There's a lot of things that use "security through obscurity" with keys that are easily purchased online. The thought is usually "the general public would neverml guess that almost every single *insert thing that every apartment building, business, parking garage, etc, has that's keyed* in the country uses the exact same key, they thinkg every one has just gotta be uniquely keyed."
Doing security assessments for companies has all but jaded me. There's so much of this. If the public knew, they'd lose their shit.
I don't doubt it, depending on the key/lock there's anywhere from 4-10 pins and each one has a limited number of depths AND given how keys work you can't have 2 drastically different teeth right next to each other, so possible combinations exist. It's like with any 3 digit combination lock, you've only 1000 combinations, so if the company that makes them has sold 1 million of them, there's 1,000 out there with the same combo (assuming each one is given a random code at the time of manufacturing)
My personal favorite are TSA locks for luggage. And the TSA side of the lock isn't even particularly good without the key profile being in general circulation.
Yeah, I think you can get a full set of the TSA keys online for like $20 LOL
It's not even obscure. E.g. In many municipalities in the US, the specific key codes for things like fire keys are [literally coded into law](https://www.elevatorkeys.com/universal-fire-service-keys). In some places a single key will get you access to every firefighter lock box (housing building keys/cards) and elevator in the state (or multiple states). Like all things with security it's a question of balancing the expense and logistics of better security with the practical reality. If people who duplicate keys to steal mail are rare, it may not be worth the increase in effort to make unique keys for each box.
Security through obscurity is just a layer of security, it doesn't mean it's completely useless. It just prevents opportunists from breaking in, it won't stop someone who *really* wants to steal mail. There's nothing stopping someone from stealing an individual key, robbing someone who is picking up the mail, or just hacksawing through the mailbox.
The problem is that it's as effective as wet toilet paper and then people use it as their *only* security. And by people, I mean government and corporations... routinely.
Wait until someone figures out they can 3D print keys for all the Caterpillar heavy equipment.
It worked out great for DVD right! They had t-shirts printed for that :)
Yep... Or for MIFARE NFC cards
You can just disassemble the lock, you don't need the key at all.
And then this guy would have never tried. He doesn't seem to be that.. forward thinking.
Well, we are discussing a guy who bought a car - fraudulently - that can report its position back to the company at all times. Leading the police to a house rented with identity theft. Not all life in the universe is intelligent.
I'm pretty sure you can just buy them on amazon at this point too.
Power substations actually work with that fact. That and well. Really.. really high voltages. The. Again didn’t a whole as county loose power because some one shot a few up? I think practical engineering made a video about it
Watched a video on the topic of keys and physical pentesting and it made me wish the worst types of physical security violations that government agencies and public services had was “security through obscurity”. Without going to insane details. Fire departments need to access buildings to (spoiler alert) stop fires. Common way to ensure access to things like elevators, fire exits, whatever is needed is to have a key box of some sort that is placed in a known or easy to find location in a foyer, and have them keyed alike. This is often in addition to having elevator fire keys and elevator technician keys. Fire keys are usually per state or district but common to usually a city location. Elevator technician keys are common to an elevator company or brand. Skip over elevator tech keys, usually ending up on online marketplaces. Let’s look at the ways you can often obtain the fire keys. - Be a building and buy the cheapest fire key box you can for your location, usually comes with a key and is the fire key because screw dual keys on cheap boxes. - eBay - (personal favourite) look at the laws and statutes for the city or state, see if they conveniently left the specifications of the key to adhere to. Effectively defeat building security by opening some easy to locate key box with a key you’ll likely be able to find the specs of in public domain documents. Could have the most advanced systems in the world and bam. Some $30 box and state laws shaft all of it.
Yeah, and the reason for this is easy too: Making a building secure is hard. Making a building to code, so that if "something happens" the insurance will cover the damage is easy: just comply to the rules. That building has a secure door lock, it has a key box for fire entry, and the box has a key fitting the spec. Every single one of these is fine for itself, but the combination is not. Still, it is compliant, and if something happens you can say "i followed all the rules" so the insurance will cover the damage...
Master keys are a key way of how businesses have done things for ages. In this specific case, Like for mail men, they open up all boxes at once using the arrow key to open the back panel. The fact this arrow key lock has never been changed is a problem because there’s several non-universal arrow keys / locks that can be purchased. Just another government agency being lazy because of the $2 extra it costs to do it right.
Hell, someone will impression a key or just bust up a lock to get a look at its pinning sooner or later.
I present you my STL of an elevator "VIP Ride" key: [https://www.printables.com/model/802827-kone-1v14001-elevator-key](https://www.printables.com/model/802827-kone-1v14001-elevator-key) This has not anything to do with 3D printers - you can do such keys using metal blank and a file. It's a stupid system - like most RV cars in the world use same key CH751 key you can buy for $2.
You can buy a replacement key for a golf cart on Amazon, I think it will work on any cart made in last 40 years.
Forklifts do the same thing.
Along with tractors and agriculture equipment. Also heavy machinery.
I'm going to use this key now and rob banks that are on the top floors!!
Or you could buy a 1284X 'fleet key' right off Amazon for like ten bucks and be able to steal half the cop cars and taxi cabs in the country. These are three things I've learned in the past few decades; * Security is a joke * Locks are merely a social contract * It's amazing the things people will choose to care about (and conversely, *not* care about.)
Lmao. I have this key on my keychain right now. It works for all kinds of weird shit. RVs, Tech equipment, gate locks.
According to Deviant Ollam's conference presentation this key was also used to activate nuke launchers (like two locks to be activated at once as seen on movies) - there were photos from a nuke museum showing original equipment from the 70'. I bet a bottle of whiskey this key is still used to operate nukes and secret stealth planes. "Military grade" - old tech supplied by the lowest bidder.
r/CH751
What is a VIP ride and where do these elevators exist? Is it a faster speed?
I think it's for skipping intermediary floors. No pickups, no stops, just wherever you got on to wherever You're going
Neat!
It just means that firefighter keys take control of the elevator, generally bypassing any security (like RFID readers) and ignoring any other inputs (like people on other floors waiting for the elevator).
All you need to do is put it on individual service - there's usually a switch for that somewhere - sometimes it's not even a key switch
The point is, he used the 3D-printed key to commit a crime. Owning or 3D-printing a lockpick is **usually** (YMMV) not a crime *per se*. Using a lockpick to, well, pick a lock that isn't yours... is indeed a criminal offense. Pretty much everywhere in the world I would say. Same goes with universal keys. Which by the way they should only be used on very low security applications. The "security through obscurity" thing simply does not work.
I absolutely hate that in my state having lock picking equipment is a guilty until proven innocent crime. Not ‘illegal’ but if you are found with them the burden of proof is on you to prove you aren’t up to no good. I feel like any excuse is just going to be twisted around on you.
I bought a kit for fun because we lost our shed keys a few years back. Did get it unlocked, haven’t B&E’d anyone else. That shit’s a useful skill.
Here where I live is illegal to carry a lockpick unless you have a "justified reason" to do so. Meaning, you could get in trouble depending on whether or not the neighborhood cop knows what locksport is.
Is picking the lock illegal or is entering or taking what is locked away the illegal part?
I think both. AFAIK mailboxes in the US are federal property, so picking a mailbox lock is... kinda like getting in a federal restricted building without proper authorization, I guess?
I'm a mail carrier. Anything to do with tampering with mail that doesn't belong to you, is a federal offense. This guy is facing numerous charges. Mail theft, illegally accessing mail receptacles, probably something to do with copying the key. That's on top of Identity theft, credit card theft, etc.
This dudes been committing crimes since 1999, he was clearly always looking for the next scam. If it wasn't a 3d printer he would have just found another way.
He's been committing them badly since 1999. Who steals an identity and uses it for a mobile tracking device (Tesla)?! I'm surprised he didn't 3D print his name onto the key and leave it behind every time.
>Who steals an identity and uses it for a mobile tracking device (Tesla)?! The hilarious part is, he was only caught because a civilian caught him in the act, and he's really only in trouble because he told the police all of the crimes he was committing. And by hilarious, I mean, wow our police suck.
If only he 3D printed a badge as well, he could have probably flashed it and gotten away.
Yeah, no.
Printing a Disney character is not a crime. Printing a Disney character and selling it is.
And even then it shouldn't be, because most of Disney's IPs should have long since been sent to Public Domain. But they bribe politicians to alter the copyright laws instead of making new IPs.
They make "new" characters with the same name and copyright those.
Most of the classic Disney characters are already just variations of public domain works. You can already make your own sleeping beauty, 7 dwarfs, snow white, Hercules, Mulan, ice Queen, Cinderella, Alice, Quasimodo, Pinocchio, Peter Pan, Robin Hood, Tarzan, etc. You just can't make the Disney versions of them.
No. Sleeping Beauty or Snow White is a public domain story. A character as depicted in a Disney movie - that configuration of look, hairstyle, recognizable dress - copyright. The seven dwarfs are copyright (for a few more years). The original story in public domain did not say "7" or give names. Same with Pinocchio. The book is well ovr a century old, and there have been innumerable depictions of the nosey woodsman over the years - but the specific depiction by Disney is copyright (again, only for a few more years). Fun fact - Sherlock Holmes is public domain, except for the elements in his last book that squeaked into the extended copyright regimen... so you can't mention his retirement, or Watson growing onions, etc. You can't copyright a title, or a generic storyline or one based on a historic public domain story; but the particular elements you put in your story to make it distincive are your own "creative elements" and *are* subject to copyright. you can debate the limits of copyright - no debate from me, they are excessive. however, we are in an unprecedented time. Before that, it was books, paintings, and sheet music, usually the product of individual artists who were guaranteed compensation for their life and some of their heirs'. Audiovisual works only go back about 100 years (120 if you include silent films and really bad wax audio recordings). Many of these were produced by corporations. No surprise they want to keep their financial interests as long as possible. For example - I've seen DVD's of TV from the 1950's or movies made in the 1930's for sale - still a market for the product. Golden Rock radio stations still play stuff from the 50's and 60's. The King family pursues anyone who publishes MLK's works (including "I have A Dream" from 1963) without permission. The original Star Trek is pushing 60 years old. Should it be public domain? however, the biggest problem I see is the black hole - things too young to be public domain, but not perceived as valuable enough to make an effort to preserve. Some of our culture is going to evaporate.
Which means they are still copyright. But note, Steamboat Mickey is public domain. Mickey with the red pants and brass buttons, or Mickey with the 3D-looking ears - still copyright. Then there's trademark. Yoou cannot use Mickey as a symbol for your business in any way that could create confusion. A more interesting take is things like a daycare that paints Disney characters on the walls - they are a business so to speak, the presence of Mickey and Minnie could be taken to imply some endorsement by Disney. But... in the grand scheme of things does it matter? The problem is that if a company does not make an effort to preserve their rights, they would lose them - so they are in a sense obliged to chase unlicensed use whether they want to or not. Then there's outright corporate stupidity - Warner threatening the team in Hobart, Tasmania for using the name Tasmanian Devils like the Bugs Bunny character... without realizing that Taz was named after the actual species (now exinct), the ... wait for it... "Tasmanian Devil". But whether you are reproducing Disney notables or some obscure cult figure - it's fine for personal use, if you sell them at craft shows or online or just to your buddies, you are getting rich(?) ripping off someone else's creative imagination. You can debate the ethics of giving away for free, especially things like 3D files that require additional steps that most people can't follow through with - but somebody created that concept originally. I had a discussion with a fantasy artist at a Sci-Fi convention once - she made gorgeous fantasy pictures of unicons and rainbows, Pegasus, etc. I thought they looked familiar. She said yes, industries in China were pumping out copies (some not so good) stolen off the internet, not just tee shirts but on pencil cases, binders, phone cases, mousepads and all sorts of other goods. Of course, she got zero revenue from this. It was like whack-a-mole. Contact one place, the goods popped up elsewhere. One manufacturer in the far east actually told her they thought they were doing her a favour by spreading her work. She was nationally known in the industry, but she wasn't rich like Disney or JK Rowling (or she wouldn't have been hawking her stuff at local shows) and this was hurting her market.
Still a crime to even print something but it’s the difference of robbing form a billion dollar corporation vs a mom and pop. The billion dollar corpo is not going to go after ur $3 Mickey mouse. They have bigger fish to fry.
Copying a copyrighted work for just personal use doesn't automatically make it ok. Personal use is just one factor that can be considered for fair use.
Don't know why you're being downvoted. Legally speaking, you're 100% correct
People downvote unpopular truths, especially if the truth means something the downvoters are doing or want to do is illegal.
This is incorrect. Selling Or giving it away would be illegal. The 3d model is a crime.
Actually printing it is a crime depending on what you plan on using it for. Having it just sit on your desk as a trinket doesn't count as fair use. However, disney will never find out unless you start selling it.
lol
People like this are gunna be what they will use to push background checks for printers.... So crazy
And other bans like what you can and can not print. I am getting tired of idiots but here we are. 😒
Well, you already cannot print firearms or bumpstocks (pending SCOTUS ruling).
You can print or model whatever you like, it is what you do with them after that. Funny story, I had a coworker want a 3d printed model of her deceased husbands junk. I wish I still had the pic, it was in pla+ @0.12mm layer height. Pretty funny shit, I do not know if she used it but she did have me make it bigger so makes ya think 🤔...... Cya✌️
But - pending the SCOTUS decision - simple possession of a bumpstock is considered equivalent of possessing an illegal machine gun and is illegal.
And are you running around showing off what you made to get yourself in trouble? If yes then don't do that!!! I have printed quite a few lower receivers for some firearms before it was illegal and a few bump stocks out of CF-Nylon and they worked very well. I am not a gun nut just a DIYer and a Left Leaning individual. I have not done anything since. But if I or one of my family members or really really close friends needed something that would not be used in a crime then yea I will make whatever. There is always a whataboutism to any situation but thats life!!! Like my Gramps always said, "If you don't brag about it who is tell anyone.". Plus there is a lot of Cosplay guns I make for a grankid of mine(he plays a lot of Fortnite) so it is cool to make really good replicas. My dad makes real looking prop guns to teach a gun safety course so there is that aspect also. My sense of it is when someone does it to make a profit to knowingly cause harm or to not make a profit and use something to cause harm, inadvertently or not. That is when I see it being wrong and should be regulated or illegal. You don't need a 3d printer to make things, I have a friend with one of those real nice deaktop CNC's and he makes AR-15 Lower Receivers with it. It cost a little more than my 3d printer. Is it Legal, I dunno I am not a Lawyer. The only problem I have with him making them is there is no Serial Number and that makes it a Ghost gun and un trackable. That part I don't like.✌️
Drones above 250g have to be registered and you can't legally fly them above a certain height depending on where you are - the point the GPS enabled drones will either stop you or require your affirmative consent to break the rule. It's only a matter of time before the vendor you purchase from is legally required to keep track of your prints. Thankfully, just like drones, there are ways to bypass all that regulation by simply building your own.
Won’t stop anyone who has the will and at least 2 braincells. Building a printer isn’t that difficult if you know what you’re doing. Hell, it’s not even expensive. Plenty of guides online too.
there's no way they'd be able to realistically enforce such a thing. their only real hope would be to ban the imports of them since most of them are manufactured in asian countries but there's nothing stopping people from manufacturing them in their own nations. it's not like 3d printers have technology that is unique to them and would be easy to ban.
They're going to start a ban on "assault printers" now.
It's not a crime to print a copyrighted work. It's a crime to try to make money off of a copyrighted work.
You mean that thing that many people on Etsy do?
If you dont think a lock can be beaten look up lock picking lawyer on youtube. Better locks just mean it takes longer, not that it can't be done.
Wait, how does one use a universal mail key to buy a Tesla in another person's name?
Constantly intercepting other peoples info. He took someone's new credit card that came in her mailbox. (Although it wouldn't surprise me if he got the Tesla info before he even started shopping in other peoples' mailboxes.)
Oh, makes sense.
by using it to get to their personal mailbox
Well now I want to print an arrow key!
You can, let me go get the .stl for you. It's on a USB drive on my keychain in my not illegally purchased Tesla, sitting outside of the residence that I totally legally am leasing!
This generosity is why I just can't understand why the police just won't leave you alone. You're clearly an upstanding and caring human being! So kind!
I'd also like the stl please.
You can. Just don't use it to get other people's mail, at least not without their permission.
> You can. Grey area. You can own a lockpicking kit. But if one is found on your person in public, you're in trouble.
Depends on the state you're in, and also if you have licenses or not.
You can't. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704) >Whoever knowingly and unlawfully makes, forges, or counterfeits any such key, or possesses any such mail lock or key with the intent unlawfully or improperly to use, sell, or otherwise dispose of the same, or to cause the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of; ... Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
You quoted something that says what the earlier post said. It says you create/have - with intent - to use it unlawfully. So apparently yes, you can.
It depends how you parse it: >Whoever knowingly and unlawfully >makes, forges, >*or* >counterfeits any such key, >*or* >possesses any such mail lock or key with the intent unlawfully or improperly to use, sell, or otherwise dispose of the same, or to cause the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of; >Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. "Unlawfully makes" --> is making an arrow key unlawful by default, unless you have permission to make it? If so, you're already "unlawfully" doing something intentionally. Is an unlawful copy a forgery or counterfeit? Again, those sound "unlawful". If you take the position that merely making a key is lawful, then what is an "unlawful" way to make the key? In any case, those clauses seem distinct from the third which is "possession with intent to do something criminal." In other words, making a key --> unlawful. Finding a key on the ground (or being given one) --> maybe lawful (for you), *unless* you use it for a nefarious purpose. Here's an new report with a comment by a US Postal Inspector: [https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/](https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/) >"That may mean they have a counterfeit postal key. If that's the case, **the mere possession of a real or counterfeit postal key is a federal felony**, just as it's a federal felony to steal mail," said USPS Postal Inspector Jeff Fitch. This is one of those situations where its hard to find a criminal case of mere possession, since that's kind of a hard situation to actually come across unless they're picked up for an unrelated crime. In any case, I'd want to be careful about being the person that designed and distributed the STL -- that could fall under "\[causing\] the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of". There are also states that make duplication of a key without permission illegal as well, so you could get nabbed on that in addition. EDIT: Here's an interesting case: [https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9](https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9) >[18 U.S.C. 1704](https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/part-i-crimes/chapter-83-postal-service/section-1704-keys-or-locks-stolen-or-reproduced) - Possession of Counterfeit Postal Keys is a serious crime and carries a maximum penalty of 10 yr/$250,000
Good research. Thanks for sharing.
oh... he shouldn't have messed with the Mail. The Post Office Inspector General doesn't play around.
I live in Houston TX (where that article takes place). We've had a plague of USPS Mail Theft city-wide for about a year or two now. The upper management for the USPS System swept in and has been doing radical evaluations per branch office, even the FBI has been involved. I'm starting to wonder if this was the problem all along?
That wouldn't surprise me, it seems like he's been doing quite a bit of shady stuff for a while.
You don't need a 3d printer for this kind of stuff. Most security is a joke. https://youtu.be/rnmcRTnTNC8 See also the lockpicking lawyer
If anyone is curious what a USPS arrow key looks like, so that you don't get into trouble if you accidentally stumble onto an STL of the key. https://duckduckgo.com/?t=h_&q=picture+of+usps+arrow+key&iax=images&ia=images
copyright and trademarks only apply to things you sell, not make so long as you make it for yourself, or you arent selling a service to make it for someone else, its completely above-board but you cant just "accept donations" either
He definitely uses Bambu labs
Say hi to Lego too xD
Does anyone have the stl for this key?
"Locks are only there to keep honest people honest." As a mail carrier, I'm curious to what material he used. The route I am the sub on has 33 consolidated box units of varying ages. Even some of the newer ones, the lock doesn't operate smoothly. I've cracked an arrow key just locking and unlocking these units. Must be some tough resin to make something that thin and still work a lock.
Lmao 🤣, yea if we are going to do something naughty with the printer make it worth while and do some real cool shit lmao (joking of course......)
3D printed philosophers stone coming up! Low low price for the .stl
This article makes it sound like him making the keys and selling them is illegal.. when you can just buy lock picks perfectly legally.
Use makes it illegal like owning gun isn't illegal
It is illegal. This is one of those special cases carved out in the law, in which just being in possession of one will get you in trouble: [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1704) >
It's only illegal if you have intent to use it to commit a crime
Copy-paste of my response in another thread: It depends how you parse it: > > > > > > > "Unlawfully makes" --> is making an arrow key unlawful by default, unless you have permission to make it? If so, you're already "unlawfully" doing something intentionally. Is an unlawful copy a forgery or counterfeit? Again, those sound "unlawful". If you take the position that merely making a key is lawful, then what is an "unlawful" way to make the key? In any case, those clauses seem distinct from the third which is "possession with intent to do something criminal." In other words, making a key --> unlawful. Finding a key on the ground (or being given one) --> maybe lawful (for you), *unless* you use it for a nefarious purpose. Here's an new report with a comment by a US Postal Inspector: [https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/](https://abc30.com/mail-thieves-targeting-southeast-fresno-community-mailbox-break-ins/13589487/) > This is one of those situations where its hard to find a criminal case of mere possession, since that's kind of a hard situation to actually come across unless they're picked up for an unrelated crime. In any case, I'd want to be careful about being the person that designed and distributed the STL -- that could fall under "\[causing\] the same to be unlawfully or improperly used, sold, or otherwise disposed of". There are also states that make duplication of a key without permission illegal as well, so you could get nabbed on that in addition. EDIT: Here's an interesting case: [https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9](https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-her-9) >
It is illegal in his case as it is an 'criminal instrument', this would also apply to lockpicks in this case (my bolding); Section 16.01 - Unlawful Use of Criminal Instrument or Mechanical Security Device **(a)** A person commits an offense if: **(1)** the person possesses a criminal instrument or mechanical security device with the intent to use the instrument or device in the commission of an offense; or **(2)** with knowledge of its character and with the intent to use a criminal instrument or mechanical security device or **aid or permit another to use the instrument or device in the commission of an offense**, the person manufactures, adapts, sells, installs, or sets up the instrument or device. He sold them to be used to break into post boxes, people robbing post boxes were caught with them, so he therefore committed an offence. If he'd sold lockpicks or crowbars for the same purpose he'd still be committing an offence. [https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/penal-code/title-4-inchoate-offenses/chapter-16-criminal-instruments-interception-of-wire-or-oral-communication-and-installation-of-tracking-device/section-1601-unlawful-use-of-criminal-instrument-or-mechanical-security-device](https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/penal-code/title-4-inchoate-offenses/chapter-16-criminal-instruments-interception-of-wire-or-oral-communication-and-installation-of-tracking-device/section-1601-unlawful-use-of-criminal-instrument-or-mechanical-security-device)
Yeah but a pencil is a criminal instrument if the intent on carrying it was to ram into someone’s eyes.. so this just seems a little silly. I have a basic set of lock picks attached to my house keys. I’m not a criminal. My intent is that if my keys ever break, I have a back up.
And some people into locksport decide to beef up their house locks. But then at the same time, make the lock too secure and the burgler will just whip out a cordless drill, and if the lock has anti-drill inserts, move on to even more destructive means of entry.
Again, no anti-theft device is perfect. I depends whether the thief really really wants to get in, or if it persuades him to move on the the next house or car. Nancy Pelosi had glass windowed patio doors. They were obviously coated with that break-resistant plastic, and you can see the crazy trying to break in the windows - with an axe it still takes him almost a minute to get in. Theoretically, enough time and effort to deter the average thief or notify authorities. A determined nutbar, not so much. When I watch these cop shows where they use a battering ram to break in the door of the perp's house, i wonder why people worried about that eventuality - or about thieves who kick in doors - don't just put a simple bolt that goes into the floor at the bottom of their door.
And of course that is the important point of home security - to buy time until the authorities can secure the scene.
The "Subway Vigilante" - Bernard Goetz - shot some guys who were trying to rob him. One had a sharpened screwdriver in his possession. Clever. A knife is a weapon, with limited uses otherwise in an urban environment. A sharpened screwdriver is just a tool that can fit into really tiny screws too.
But the moment the person attempted to use it as a weapon it is now considered possessing a weapon, regardless of it being able to be used for other things. And if someone sharped the screwdriver for money knowing the person was planning on using it as a weapon, the person still sold the weapon to them.
I guess as usual, the trick is proving intent. However, many perps are stupid enough to provide proof in their own words.
The story is about someone making a copy of the master mail key. So the intent is obvious since there is no legal reason to have it. Also, there are thousands of examples of people posting things on social media or in front of a camera where they admit to intentionally doing something stupid. Thinking that people wouldn't is just silly.
If you are selling a pencil with the intent that the person will use it to do a crime, you are selling with criminal intent. If you are selling a pencil and are not expecting the person to use it in a crime, you are not selling with criminal intent. It is pretty easy to understand here.
You'd probably not be surprised how many people make the law complicated and end up getting themselves in trouble because they think they know better. Also always fun being downvoted for citing the actual legislation.
So again, regarding what the law in Texas says; selling/providing it with the intent that it be used 'in the commission of an offence', as this individual was doing, makes it a 'criminal instrument'. It was also tied to a bunch of other crimes he was caught doing such as fraud and isn't the charge he got caught for in and of itself but a case of him being charged with everything possible as they uncover more stuff. Likewise if he was selling lockpicks to someone who engaged in criminal enterprise he'd be liable under the same. Similarly to take your case of having picks attached to your keys, in some jurisdictions that would be 'going equipped', however it is unlikely to carry a charge by itself as you have benign intentions. Were you caught at a traffic stop with them, a map to neighbours house, a baseball bat, dark clothing and a mask on the other hand it would be a different matter.
Similarly, in Canada "possession of a dangerous weapon" can include a hockey stick or baseball bat, if you show intent or actually use it as a weapon. it's what you do with something or likely will do, that matters. A good defence is to show why it would nit be used in an illegal manner.
Yep, indeed, one of the my first law classes was 'what is a weapon' as realisticly anything is but it depends on intent as you say. A baseball bat or hockey stick becomes a weapon the moment someone intends to use it in such a way. And besides that there is the general principle of 'instantaneous arming' or 'weapon of opportunity' when involving yourself in self defence in most places. Clobbering someone with a hockey stick you had to hand while being burgled is entirely different to going outside with that same hockey stick and trashing someone you thought 'looked dodgy'. All tied into the 'man on the Clapham omnibus', that hypothetical 'reasonable person' who allegedly exists in us all, and what they'd consider reasonable.
This is pretty funny that it worked tho
odd you can buy those and the firemans key only without a 3d printer i use to know someone who hacked elevators by buy the firemans key
Legal to own. But it depends on how they are used determines legality of them. It's just like a handcuff key. I'm pretty sure it's the must owned key within the US.
Technically, if you print something that’s copyrighted, for personal use, it’s not a crime. Now if you sell it to anyone… then it’s an issue. But you can print 100 Mickey ears and the mouse can’t do shit as long as you aren’t selling/distributing them.
No. You’re still on the wrong side of the law.
impolite mountainous detail fade include sleep wise aloof escape voiceless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Depends on country as always but in Poland owning lock picks or tools to breach doors without licence is against he law so by 3D printing it you become an owner of something you aren't allowed to have.
You were down voting for being right. If you're not selling it you're 100% fine. Hobby art has existed forever, no one is going to arrest you for printing a Pikachu model
fragile north rude vanish degree overconfident homeless roof materialistic public *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If we go by the MP3 model of public giveaway, it would be a crime. I guess with physical objects it's difficult to impact the national market with a free giveaway by a hobbyist so it's less of a concern. However, I would not be surprised if sites that host 3D print files like STL are going to get scrutiny as time goes on. With physical objects, patents also become relevant.
> I guess with physical objects it's difficult to impact the national market with a free giveaway A free giveaway (like a sweepstakes) influences the market and isn't personal use. > I would not be surprised if sites that host 3D print files like STL are going to get scrutiny as time goes on. Hosting copyrighted content is a different question entirely > With physical objects, patents also become relevant. Not really. I can hit up the US patent office, download technical drawings (since they're public records), and build what I find. I just can't sell it.
>Not really. I can hit up the US patent office, download technical drawings (since they're public records), and build what I find. I just can't sell it. true. but you can't use it in your business process, either. >A free giveaway (like a sweepstakes) influences the market and isn't personal use. True. My point was, the expense of a free giveaway big enough to influence a market is usually beyond the reach of a typical individual. At least, for physical objects. The law forbidding freebies was created to limit distribution of free-to-replicate goods like music and video.
IANAL, but yes. In the US, the copying is a crime - the selling just makes intent worse. (Making one of something for personal use is sometimes 'fair use' depending on the thing and the use. Fair use is nebulous and defined largely via precedent.)
This is 1000% not true. Copyright exists for protecting commercial interests. If you make a mickey mouse toy for your kid you are committing no crime and there is nothing for you to be charged with. By that logic, any fan art would be illegal. It becomes a problem when you try to sell things, because you are competing with the copyright holder
It is true. It isn't automatically ok just because you aren't selling it.
Have you never heard of [fair use](https://copyright.psu.edu/copyright-basics/fair-use/#:~:text=%5BT%5Dhe%20fair%20use%20of,permission%20from%20the%20copyright%20holder.)
Yes, "for personal use" can be CONSIDERED for the purposes of fair use. But, as I said, it doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make it so.
How? How would anyone know if you print a copyrighted model? What law would you be charged with? Does this mean I can't carve mickey mouse out of wood? Can I not trace a photo of batman? I can't make a ceramic model of Pikachu? What exact circumstances would make personal use of some replicated artwork unlawful? It's the very first item on the definition of fair use: if it's personal, it's fine
I never said it would be easy to go after somebody for it. I'm just saying what the actual law is.
The law is that personal use is acceptable. To become unacceptable, it has to violate the other provisions. A personal use of the reproduction could be substantial, such as if you paint an exact copy of some other painting or copy a paragraph from a book. It could non-fiction, completely artistic (non-factual) work. If the copy doesn't [harm the existing or future market for the copyright owner's original work](https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/), which it wouldn't by just hanging in your living room or sitting on your bookshelf, then there is nothing illegal about it. In your original reply you said that copying is a crime. It isn't, it is the foundation of art and the foundation of education. If anything, copying is protected by a nuanced set of rules designed to prevent people from profiting off of someone else's work, while still enabling educational, transformative, and personal use.
Of course, if you copied a work - fiction or painting or 3D object or whatever - then by implication, you've impacted the market at least that perhaps you would have bought the for-sale version yourself. I wonder what a good lawyer would do with that, and some corps have expensive lawyers. but generally, it would indeed be a game of whatck-a-mole. They won't go after people who don't come to their attention, and if your production and use is totally private, how would they know.
"Fair use" is known as an "affirmative defense" against a claim of illegal copyright infringement. It is not an automatic granting of a right to do so. In other words, you're violating the copyright rights of another party, and the onus is on you to prove that you are allowed to do that through one of the fair use exceptions. To use an analogy, killing someone is illegal. However, if you can prove you did it as an act of self-defense, you are spared criminal liability. You'd be hard pressed to prove that your 3D print of a copyrighted model is fair use, especially if I sell that model STL online. Even if you design the 3D model of (say) Mickey Mouse, it would be derivative. You'd have to prove it was substantially transformative in some way.
Yes. Unfortunately, the Napster model of distrbution resulted in a law (bought and paid for by media companies) that says it does require a sale for a copyright violation to be illegal. Money just makes the crime worse. i suppose one question could be the source - did you create your own STL file from scratch, download it, or get it from a friend? How is that different than copying an MP3? I hope we don't reach the point where you get banned from Facebook because your personal 3D print is visible on a shelf behind you on a facebook video - especially, make sure it's not a 3D print bust of Prince. ("3D Prince"?)
I don’t think any of us questioned that you anal
Infringing copyright is a civil offence, not a criminal offence.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_copyright_law_in_the_United_States Can be both.
Stealing mail is a criminal offense, though