Is there anything legally stopping you from making your town think you’re a gangster who robbed a bank and somehow got away with it?

If the goal is to convince other people to think you’re a bank robber, but without actually having to rob a bank, I think it could be done with much less effort and likely more effective. But this then gets into the ethical line between little white lies and outright deception or misinformation.

Because one way to achieve that goal is to doctor a bunch of evidence that would “incriminate” yourself, such as AI-generated video, then disseminate that to local reporter s, while also plastering it on social media using astroturf accounts, and might as well stuff a copy into a manila envelope and mail to the local District Attorney.

And all of that is probably legal in most jurisdictions in the USA, with the probable sole exception of intentionally wasting the prosecutor’s office’s effort, since they had not solicited such evidence. Compare this to “tip lines”, which expressly seek info and they are fully cognizant that not all the tips will be good.

This seems like a management/organizational issue, and so that means it needs to be handled by your manager, who would then figure out how to approach their counterparts on the other team. You would provide as detailed of info as you can to your manager, and leave it with them to best deal with that matter. If your manager needs concrete examples of how company time/effort is being wasted by the other team’s shenanigans, help them help you.

If you’re in engineering, your focus is to build stuff and make it work. And your manager’s focus is to maintain the prerequisites for you to do your job. This does necessarily mean that in the interim, while management works on a resolution, you may still be asked to fix some of their mess. And you should do so, in a professional manner, to the best degree that you can stomach. Obv, if management drags the issue out, then you’ll have to weigh your options, since it would demonstrate a management chain that isn’t doing their own job properly. And that’s no environment conducive to success on your part.

Possession of content – with the unique exception of CSAM – in the USA does not draw a distinction between how it was acquired, whether or not it may have violated a license or copyright. The primary provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976 are to protect the production and distribution of copyrighted works. So unless your stash of content is being hosted on a server for others to access – which constitutes distribution, though one could possibly argue that if no one ever accessed it, it’s not distribution – then the mere possession does not incur criminal liability. Of course, civil liability may attach, meaning that the copyright holder could sue you for the cost of buying a legit license. Though there’s zero reason for the police to pass that info to whomever the copyright holder is. Whether police can gratuitously share investigation info with a third-party is a matter of state law.

But the other potential criminal charge could come from the infamous DMCA, whose provisions make it a crime to circumvent DRMs. Though this provision has an out, whereby certain circumvention is permitted as exceptions for designated purposes, created and renewed through a regulatory process. Outside these exceptions, the standard defense of fair-use for copyright infringement does not apply to a charge of DMCA circumvention. So if the police could put together evidence that your content stash is the product of circumvention, and other evidence shows that you used or have the tools/software to perform that circumvention, that’s technically a charge which could be leveled.

This would take a colossal amount of effort, for something which generally has to be brought by the (federal) US Attorney’s office, rather than a state-level District Attorney. So realistically, this would only really be considered if you somehow managed to annoy an FBI investigator enough. And even then, it’s quite petty to charge DMCA circumvention alone.

If your content was purely acquired through download-only means – as in, not BitTorrent – then I can’t think of what criminal charge could be raised. But IANAL.

For an example of when a dam is teetering upon catastrophic failure, with operators stuck between a rock and a hard place, see the 2017 Oroville Dam crisis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oroville_Dam_crisis

This was covered in a Plainly Difficult video on YouTube, as well as other channels like Practical Engineering (also on YT).

Essentially, in that situation, in anticipation of heavy rainfall, the operators were discharging water until they found the main spillway was becoming damaged (uncovering shoddy work from decades ago). But the amount of rain meant that using the never-tested emergency spillway might actually damage the dam foundations. So in the end, they had no choice but to use the main spillway, as the less worse of two awful choices.

Known only after the fact, 2017 was a particularly wet year in California, coming after years of drought conditions. So holding onto water within the reservoir wasn’t imprudent. But a flaw in the main spillway, and lack of testing of the backup, made a bad situation worse, turning into a full blown emergency for the people living below the tallest dam in the USA.

There was a video by PolyMatter recently on the economics of why Apple cannot yet move the bulk of iPhone manufacturing away from China (available on Nebula and on YouTube). This is perhaps the singular quote which helps answer your question, around the 02:35 mark:

Any country can assemble the iPhone. But Apple doesn’t need to make an iPhone, it needs to make 590 every minute, it needs 35,000 per hour, 849,000 per day, 5.9 million per week. That’s the challenge facing Apple.

The sheer scale of Apple’s manufacturing – setting aside Samsung’s also humongous scale – means that there might not be a supplier for that quantity of large image sensor or new-tech batteries. Now, Apple could drive that sort of market, and they probably are working on it. But as the video explains, Apple’s style is more about finding an edge which they can exclusively hone, up to and including the outright buying out of the supplier. This keeps them ahead of the competition, at least for long enough until it doesn’t matter anymore.

In some ways, this might sound like Apple has a touch of Not Invented Here Syndrome, but realistically, consumers expect that Apple is going to do something so outlandish and non-standard that to simply be jumping onto a bandwagon of “already researched” technology would be considered a failure. They are, after all, a market leader, irrespective of what one might think about the product itself.

Historical example of heavy R&D paying dividends until it stopped being relevant: Sony’s Trinitron CRT patent expired just around the time that LCDs started showing up in the consumer space. Any competitor could finally start producing CRT TVs with the same qualities as a Sony Trinitron TV, but why would they? The world had moved on, and so had Sony.

In brief, Apple probably can’t deliver to the world a new iPhone with massive image sensors right now. But that certainly doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have their camera team looking into it and working with partners to scale up the manufacturing, such as by increasing yield or being very clever, probably both. Ever since that one time an iPhone prototype was found in a Bay Area bar, their opsec for new prototypes has been top notch. So we’ll only know when we know.

I mean, amateur radio was illegal to encrypt

Was? I’m not familiar with a jurisdiction that presently allows licensed amateur radio operators to send encrypted or even obfuscated messages, with the unique exception of control-and-command instructions for amateur radio satellites. The whole exercise of ham radio is to openly communicate, with other frequencies and services available for encrypted comms and whatever else.

To be abundantly clear, I very much support encryption because it keeps good people honest and frustrates bad people. But it’s hard to see how, for ham radio, encryption could be reconciled with the open and inviting spirit that has steered the radio community for over a century. In a lot of ways, hams were doing FOSS well before the acronym came into existence.

I have great admiration for the radio operators, precisely because when all the major infrastructure falters, it takes only a battery and a wire up a tree to recover some semblance of connectivity.

(this is entirely tangential to the OP’s question, but I feel like hams deserve a good word every so often. Also, I understand that last weekend was ARRL Field Day in the USA)