I wrote that text when I worked for EFF!

Anyway, two things about this:

* EFF definitely did not think that the regular printer tracking dots mechanism was appropriate.

* You could probably argue this either as a modus ponens or a modus tollens -- that is, in either direction -- but one criticism that we made of the tracking dots was that they were (mostly) secret voluntary cooperation between industry and government, not an actual law. Perhaps an actual law is preferable because the public can understand in detail how it's being restricted, as well as oppose it politically and potentially challenge it in the courts.

Of course, the current 3D printing restrictions are proposed as an actual law. That does seem largely better to me than "we got most 3D printer companies to put some secret software in their printers to enforce some unspecified policies that the government asked them to, and the companies and the government don't want to talk about it", although one way it's better is simply the opportunity to oppose it in the legislature.

Thanks for trying to maintain the list as long as you could!

I think you are assuming that the government does not _also_ have secret agreements with big 3D printer manufacturers (to which the state of CA may not be privy)