"after doing his time"
So then have BigBalls at least do his time before handing him the keys to the kingdom.
So then have BigBalls at least do his time before handing him the keys to the kingdom.
Given that he hasn't been charged with a crime (much less convicted), the "time" he is due to serve is zero.
Based on what I read, the minimum would be aiding and abetting. At least, that's what it would be here in Wisconsin.
Not a lawyer but I think that only sticks if the CDN he managed was specifically built for criminals and the selling points were to hide criminal activity similar to some bullet-proof hosting solutions otherwise Akamai, Bunny, Cloudflare and many others would be seized as they have a myriad of criminals utilizing their network as well but I could be wrong. Was there solid evidence that this CDN was purpose built for criminal usage such as proof of intent?
Why? If he knew it was being used for crime sufficiently to let him brag about it to the FBI, he’s complicit.
I don't follow. I can brag about Akamai or Cloudflare being used for criminal activity and still use it myself or even promote it to others. That is a strong selling point in that if criminals can use it then it's less likely my crass meme sites might be taken down.
Was the CDN he promoted only sold to criminals explicitly for criminal activity? e.g. not logging admin access, hiding identities of criminals, promoting the support of illegal content, etc... The difference in my eye is the intent to use for illegal means vs. the illegal usage of a generic tool as a by-product. Was he actively promoting illegal usage to the would-be clients? As for boasting about it to the FBI I would want to hear the actual dialogue. Media have been putting slants on details as they know crapping on DOGE is popular right now.
In reference to intent an example would be if one hosts an anonymous forum or chan site and someone uploads illegal content they are protected from criminal prosecution assuming they quickly remove said content whereas if they host an anonymous forum or chan site and promote the sharing of illegal material then they are no longer protected.
You're not running Akamai or Cloudflare.
True, but I have used Akamai knowing full well it is used by criminals. Whether I am running or not is unrelated unless it is being promoted to criminals for crime. Intent is what matters here in my opinion. If it was purpose built for crime and/or I am promoting it to be used for criminal activity them I am complicit in the usage of said crimes. Was BigBalls promoting the CDN to potential clients for the use of criminal activity?
Is that difference enough to make it criminal? I dunno, I'm not a lawyer. But pretending the difference is meaningless is unhelpful.
Again, this is a nonsense test. I can’t get out of being a getaway driver for a bank robbery by claiming I once did a regular Uber. (I’m ignoring the irony of bending over backwards like this to exonerate a kid illegally mucking around in our agencies at the behest of our first felon President jailing folks without a trial or legal warrant.)
Of course you can. If it can be proven your intent was to help the bank robbers then you are complicit in the crime. If criminals used your service and you were either unaware or afraid for your life then at worst you would be a victim.
If you repeatedly found yourself in that situation, got paid for it each time, never reported it and bragged about it, no, you would be an accomplice. You would certainly claim to be a victim. (Everyone in Silicon Valley is a victim nowadays.) But that would be a poor defence, certainly against criminal investigation.
To your point about money I think that is also a factor but in a different way. If every CDN/DNS/Registrar held their customers to the standards of their AuP/ToS they would lose most of their customers. When you get a chance read your AuP/ToS on your CDN/DNS/Registrar/VPS provider. Even lewd content highly subjective is an account terminating offense. They do this so they do not get sued or the suit is dismissed when they have to terminate an account but if they enforced it strictly nobody would invest in them and they would have no customers.
I think I will leave the topic here since the thread was flagged. It has been an interesting and thought provoking discussion. I must go feed the critters now.
Your uber driver might have it, but gas stations certainly don't.
Is it criminal if a gas station owner openly admits they don't check ID and their customers include criminals.
It's radical lefty anti-establishment behaviour which is obviously criminal and I can't believe you're even asking such a ridiculous question when anyone who has lived in the real world for longer than a week would implicitly know the answer.
I would have used caps in select places to improve the parody, but I didn't want to seem actually serious.
[1] https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-ccips/l...