3 ms·
You're leaving out "knowingly," which is an operative word there. If Google puts out a product offering called "Gmail for Pimps" or a maps overlay called "Wher
by jstarfish 9y ago
You're leaving out "knowingly," which is an operative word there.
If Google puts out a product offering called "Gmail for Pimps" or a maps overlay called "Where My Bitches At?" then they might be complicit in something. Until then, they are afforded deniability.
- rayiner 9y agoI'm not leaving out "knowingly." Google "knows" that its services are used to do all sorts of unsavory things. You have to assume that Gmail and Gchat have been used to arrange murders. Your examples cross the line from "knowing" to "intent." They show not only knowledge that products are used for illegal activities, but intention to encourage and profit from that illegal activity. Releasing "Gmail for Pimps" would suggest specific intent to profit from prostitution, rather than just "knowing" that Gmail is being used for prostitution. "Knowing" and "intent" are terms of art in criminal law, and "knowing" is well understood as being a lower standard than "intent." The law uses "knowing" on purpose.
- slededit 9y agoThat is a much broader reading then is used elsewhere. In general specific knowledge is required. > The word “knowingly” in law means consciously or with knowledge or complete understanding of the facts or circumstances. https://definitions.uslegal.com/k/knowingly/ https://definitions.uslegal.com/k/knowingly/
- mrunkel 9y agoNo, if someone else uses Google's tools to create a product offering called "Gmail for Pimps" Google is liable.