4 ms·

I don’t buy the guy’s analogy of crime and association. If you willingly lend the keys to your truck to someone else, and he or she commits a crime while using

by mproud 8y ago

I don’t buy the guy’s analogy of crime and association. If you willingly lend the keys to your truck to someone else, and he or she commits a crime while using the vehicle, it might get impounded. Know the people whom you work with, or just do the work yourself.

drucik 8y ago
I think ban from an app store for a platform is something more like “if someone commits a crime using your vehicle, you might lose your driving permit”.
eeeeeeeeeeeee 8y ago
That is a bit of a silly comparison. Even if you let a criminal borrow your car and they do something bad, there is some sort of legal apparatus to get your car back if it's clear that you were not involved in that criminal activity. The impound lot doesn't simply say "sorry, we saw your appeal, but we're gonna go ahead and keep the car forever."
- jjeaff 8y ago
  You would think. But civil forfeiture doesn't care who owns what they take, only whether it was used in a crime. You may be stuck paying court costs to defend your property and get it back. Which is why we have tons of ridiculous court cases like: "Bag full of hundred dollar bills V. US Government."
  - behringer 8y ago
    There's a lot of people that think civil forfeiture is also fundamentally wrong.
- dhimes 8y ago
  Not just keep the car, but "you can never drive in country again."
- justtopost 8y ago
  There is no such apparatus. Any property used in comission of a crime is forfit, no matter of original owner. Stolen guns, cars and cert are all treated the same under the law. On the other hand, I get great deals at police auctions and never lend out my keys.
  - eeeeeeeeeeeee 8y ago
    Yes, there is, it's called the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. It's called the US legal system. That is the apparatus. You have no constitutional right to have a Google account. And you probably agreed to forced arbitration in the Google TOS and likely even agreed that Google can terminate your account for any reason, at any time, without cause. Good example: https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police-practices/police-tennessee-legally-steal-veterans-car https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/reforming-poli... Son commits crime using father's car and car is seized using civil forfeiture. The car has already been returned and the ACLU is fighting the police department in federal court: https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/cain.complaint.pdf https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/cain.complaint.pdf Not saying civil forfeiture doesn't need to be reigned in, it does, but there is a legal apparatus for getting your stuff back. I admit it gets trickier on things that cannot be traced easily, like cash, but I'm mostly responding to the OPs example of an innocent persons car being used in a crime by someone else. Another good example below where the owner of the vehicle committed a crime in the car they owned and the state tried to seize the vehicle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbs_v._Indiana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbs_v._Indiana So, I admit the legal system moves slow, but there is clearly a strong legal case for fighting these unlawful seizures.
deogeo 8y ago
A better analogy is you unknowingly hire someone who was once convicted, in a secret trial, of a 'crime'. You are then jailed, without being informed who the incriminating hire was.
- system2 8y ago
  No, you let them use your name and sign the papers for them while they are committing the crime. You are now an accomplice.
on_and_off 8y ago
This, also Mark accessed his account for the first time after this issue ? It sounds a lot like he gave his credentials to his dev team which is a major violation of the ToS of the play store. But hey, looks like reading these is too hard, better to just whine afterwards.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  What makes it a "major" violation? It sounds quite minor to me.
- holoduke 8y ago
  No he probably added team members to the playstore account. So people can login with their own Google accounts. That's a feature inside their product and accepted .
millisecond 8y ago
It’s more like you lend your truck to someone who committed a crime sometime in the past and now you’re banned from ever driving again.

by mproud 8y ago

drucik 8y ago

I think ban from an app store for a platform is something more like “if someone commits a crime using your vehicle, you might lose your driving permit”.

eeeeeeeeeeeee 8y ago

That is a bit of a silly comparison. Even if you let a criminal borrow your car and they do something bad, there is some sort of legal apparatus to get your car back if it's clear that you were not involved in that criminal activity. The impound lot doesn't simply say "sorry, we saw your appeal, but we're gonna go ahead and keep the car forever."

jjeaff 8y ago
You would think. But civil forfeiture doesn't care who owns what they take, only whether it was used in a crime. You may be stuck paying court costs to defend your property and get it back. Which is why we have tons of ridiculous court cases like: "Bag full of hundred dollar bills V. US Government."
- behringer 8y ago
  There's a lot of people that think civil forfeiture is also fundamentally wrong.
dhimes 8y ago
Not just keep the car, but "you can never drive in country again."
justtopost 8y ago
There is no such apparatus. Any property used in comission of a crime is forfit, no matter of original owner. Stolen guns, cars and cert are all treated the same under the law. On the other hand, I get great deals at police auctions and never lend out my keys.
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 8y ago
  Yes, there is, it's called the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. It's called the US legal system. That is the apparatus. You have no constitutional right to have a Google account. And you probably agreed to forced arbitration in the Google TOS and likely even agreed that Google can terminate your account for any reason, at any time, without cause. Good example: https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police-practices/police-tennessee-legally-steal-veterans-car https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/reforming-poli... Son commits crime using father's car and car is seized using civil forfeiture. The car has already been returned and the ACLU is fighting the police department in federal court: https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/cain.complaint.pdf https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/cain.complaint.pdf Not saying civil forfeiture doesn't need to be reigned in, it does, but there is a legal apparatus for getting your stuff back. I admit it gets trickier on things that cannot be traced easily, like cash, but I'm mostly responding to the OPs example of an innocent persons car being used in a crime by someone else. Another good example below where the owner of the vehicle committed a crime in the car they owned and the state tried to seize the vehicle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbs_v._Indiana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbs_v._Indiana So, I admit the legal system moves slow, but there is clearly a strong legal case for fighting these unlawful seizures.

deogeo 8y ago

A better analogy is you unknowingly hire someone who was once convicted, in a secret trial, of a 'crime'. You are then jailed, without being informed who the incriminating hire was.

system2 8y ago
No, you let them use your name and sign the papers for them while they are committing the crime. You are now an accomplice.

on_and_off 8y ago

This, also Mark accessed his account for the first time after this issue ? It sounds a lot like he gave his credentials to his dev team which is a major violation of the ToS of the play store. But hey, looks like reading these is too hard, better to just whine afterwards.

Dylan16807 8y ago
What makes it a "major" violation? It sounds quite minor to me.
holoduke 8y ago
No he probably added team members to the playstore account. So people can login with their own Google accounts. That's a feature inside their product and accepted .

millisecond 8y ago

It’s more like you lend your truck to someone who committed a crime sometime in the past and now you’re banned from ever driving again.