4 ms·

I'm not a lawyer but I can confirm that there's no more that we can do to control content than Google can for the web or email. We (OB1) follow US law in our se

I'm not a lawyer but I can confirm that there's no more that we can do to control content than Google can for the web or email. We (OB1) follow US law in our services but we have no control of the p2p network.

ExcelSaga 9y ago
You should probably talk to a lawyer, because given what’s been said in this thread alone, you’re never going to be able to argue that you didn’t knowingly facilitate. Love it or hate it, new laws make that problematic even for Google. I mean, this is damning: Illegality and immorality are different, and - speaking personally - I don't have an issue with the platform used for moral but illegal uses.
- cgmg 9y ago
  Why do you think that is damning?
  - quiq 9y ago
    I believe a bunch of legislation has language regarding being "aware" and "knowingly facilitating." Safe harbor goes out the window if you know things are going on and do nothing. How being p2p factors in is beyond my armchair.
    - acct1771 9y ago
      Because Google isn't aware of pirate/CP search results on their platform?
      - thinkloop 9y ago
        I too think this statement matters with regards to law. Knowing that your platform can be used nefariously is one thing, being ok with it is another. Once the witch hunt starts it can get tricky fast.
      - zaarn 9y ago
        And SESTA/FOSTA will apply to them too. It's a horrible set of laws.
    - rebuilder 9y ago
      Does that apply to software developers as well as service providers? Wouldn't the Tor project get prosecuted into the ground under such legislation?
  - IAmGraydon 9y ago
    It's obviously damning because it shows that he knows he's potentially facilitating illegal activity.
- stiangrindvoll 9y ago
  A blacksmith knows good and well that his newly forged hammer, meant for building and construction, is also used for destruction and despair.
  - kennywinker 9y ago
    I'm pretty sure a vanishingly small number of hammers actually get used for destruction and despair, so I would have no problem being involved in hammer production. It does not just matter that something CAN be used for evil, it matters how likely it WILL be used for evil.
    - thinkloop 9y ago
      It seems you fully understand op's point!
stef25 9y ago
Google can and does delist content, for example in response to copyright violations. I don't think you're able or willing to delist content right?
he0001 9y ago
Well that what happened to the guys behind piratebay. They weren’t responsible for the actual content, but they were still convicted since they made it possible. Right or wrong, sometimes how the tech actually work doesn’t matter.
- patrickaljord 9y ago
  The piratebay had direct access to their database index and deleting content was as easy as running "delete from torrents where torrent_hash='xyz'". This case is different, there is no way for openbazaar to delete remote nodes hosted by other people. It's like ordering Google to delete content hosted on someone else server, they can remove it from their index but the server would still be online accessible to all.
  - he0001 9y ago
    Well they weren’t convicted because they didn’t delete it, they were convicted because they made it available. The hash is still not the actual content, which were One of their actual argument in their case. Depending on where you live there are serves cases where making things available is criminal. Have ISPs ordered to block domains etc. VPN is illegal in China etc.
    - patrickaljord 9y ago
      > Well they weren’t convicted because they didn’t delete it, they were convicted because they made it available. They did. The piratebay default search engine allowed people to find illegal content. That's why they got in trouble. If Google Chrome default search engine had CP and drugs on it, they'd get into trouble too. Anyone can use chrome to find CP but Google is ok because they don't enable it by default. As long as OpenBazaar default search engine does not contain anything illegal and forces people to use a different search engine to find illegal stuff, they will not get into trouble.
      - he0001 9y ago
        The law they broke was “assist in copyright infringement”, not that they actually broke “copyright infringement”. The law don’t care about the tech, it’s about the intentions.

ExcelSaga 9y ago

You should probably talk to a lawyer, because given what’s been said in this thread alone, you’re never going to be able to argue that you didn’t knowingly facilitate. Love it or hate it, new laws make that problematic even for Google. I mean, this is damning: Illegality and immorality are different, and - speaking personally - I don't have an issue with the platform used for moral but illegal uses.

cgmg 9y ago
Why do you think that is damning?
- quiq 9y ago
  I believe a bunch of legislation has language regarding being "aware" and "knowingly facilitating." Safe harbor goes out the window if you know things are going on and do nothing. How being p2p factors in is beyond my armchair.
  - acct1771 9y ago
    Because Google isn't aware of pirate/CP search results on their platform?
    - thinkloop 9y ago
      I too think this statement matters with regards to law. Knowing that your platform can be used nefariously is one thing, being ok with it is another. Once the witch hunt starts it can get tricky fast.
    - zaarn 9y ago
      And SESTA/FOSTA will apply to them too. It's a horrible set of laws.
  - rebuilder 9y ago
    Does that apply to software developers as well as service providers? Wouldn't the Tor project get prosecuted into the ground under such legislation?
- IAmGraydon 9y ago
  It's obviously damning because it shows that he knows he's potentially facilitating illegal activity.
stiangrindvoll 9y ago
A blacksmith knows good and well that his newly forged hammer, meant for building and construction, is also used for destruction and despair.
- kennywinker 9y ago
  I'm pretty sure a vanishingly small number of hammers actually get used for destruction and despair, so I would have no problem being involved in hammer production. It does not just matter that something CAN be used for evil, it matters how likely it WILL be used for evil.
  - thinkloop 9y ago
    It seems you fully understand op's point!

stef25 9y ago

Google can and does delist content, for example in response to copyright violations. I don't think you're able or willing to delist content right?

he0001 9y ago

Well that what happened to the guys behind piratebay. They weren’t responsible for the actual content, but they were still convicted since they made it possible. Right or wrong, sometimes how the tech actually work doesn’t matter.

patrickaljord 9y ago
The piratebay had direct access to their database index and deleting content was as easy as running "delete from torrents where torrent_hash='xyz'". This case is different, there is no way for openbazaar to delete remote nodes hosted by other people. It's like ordering Google to delete content hosted on someone else server, they can remove it from their index but the server would still be online accessible to all.
- he0001 9y ago
  Well they weren’t convicted because they didn’t delete it, they were convicted because they made it available. The hash is still not the actual content, which were One of their actual argument in their case. Depending on where you live there are serves cases where making things available is criminal. Have ISPs ordered to block domains etc. VPN is illegal in China etc.
  - patrickaljord 9y ago
    > Well they weren’t convicted because they didn’t delete it, they were convicted because they made it available. They did. The piratebay default search engine allowed people to find illegal content. That's why they got in trouble. If Google Chrome default search engine had CP and drugs on it, they'd get into trouble too. Anyone can use chrome to find CP but Google is ok because they don't enable it by default. As long as OpenBazaar default search engine does not contain anything illegal and forces people to use a different search engine to find illegal stuff, they will not get into trouble.
    - he0001 9y ago
      The law they broke was “assist in copyright infringement”, not that they actually broke “copyright infringement”. The law don’t care about the tech, it’s about the intentions.