As a side, DSA now has a budget line of rifles that they use a cast receiver on. Its not something they glaringly advertise, but buyer beware.

A quick internet search turned up this.

http://www.falfiles.com/forums/printthread.php?t=295731&pp=28&page=2

To be totally clear: I do not believe there is a single licensed manufacturer of FN FAL remaining.

I don't know about Argentina and Brazil's past agreements with FN, but to my knowledge there has NEVER been a US based FN licensed manufacturer. DSA falls FAR short.

I think DSA turned down the license.

And I can turn in ten dozen websites that state differently. FN's rep told me Imbel was licensed in 1964 after the purchase of rifles in 1954 for evaluation. They also stated all patents and licensing no longer applies.

Imbel was sued for changing the details which resulted in the M964 rifle.

This, allegedly, became the basis for the revised licensing program that allowed variations (unlike the HK licensing model).

Springfield Armory sold the rifle as a "licensed copy". I have original advertising (some where).

Lee (on FALFiles) is a known expert, but he is often wrong and reluctant to admit it.

DSA was never offered a license. DSA came into existence in the mid 1990's about ten years after FN stopped production / licensing.

Have you ever spoken to Dave (the owner of DSA)? I had a lengthy conversation with him the day I ordered seven custom Para FALs and six fixed Stocks. I went away with the feeling he and Lynn Thompson should be friends.

For reference, I've owned over 50 FALs during the past 15 years and have personally spoken with Mark Graham, Dave Selvaggio, and a past FN representative.

The clear indication was: all wanted to make money.

No to all of your questions, and I'm not trying to show proof one way or the other. I'm just showing one place I found that information, whether it's true or not. I did mention that I could be wrong.

Correction, past 20 years. I bought my first back in 1994. I bought my first DSA in 96 IIRC.

I've even fired a real full auto FAL. It was a turd.

There's a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding about FALs. A large overstatement is the number of countries that "adopted" it.

Anyway:

1) DSA is not nor have they ever been "licensed" by FN.
2) To my knowledge, no US manufacturer has ever been granted a permanent license to manufacturer. There were several FALs made for the 1950's trials.
3) FN has distanced itself from the FAL in an effort to promote more modern (and less expensive to manufacture) products like the polymer based line (PS90, etc) and the aluminum / polymer Scars.

This is a shame, because a quality FAL is a fine weapon even by today's standards. It has "short comings" such as difficulty in mounting optics, but its real "problem" is the cost to make it.

This is why Century, DSA, Enterprise, IAI, et al sourced surplus parts. This is also why the quality of DSA rifles tanked in mid-2008 (they started running out of quality parts and started using MIM, etc).

I'm getting out of FALs, and have been selling off my collection. I just looked at my records. This year (just 2014) I have sold:

(4) DSA SA58 Fixed Stock
(5) DSA SA58 Para
(1) Springfield Armory SAR-48
(4) Springfield Armory SAR-4800

I still have three SAR-48 to move down the road.

Regardless, of perception or the above disagreement. Anyone who possesses a quality FAL is well armed indeed. I just think the SCAR is a better for my needs.

Edited: found another SAR4800 I sold.