3 ms·
If you're wondering why a web host, who could potentially be immune to prosecution under CDA 230, was charged with the distribution of child pornography, accord
by searcher1 7y ago
If you're wondering why a web host, who could potentially be immune to prosecution under CDA 230, was charged with the distribution of child pornography, according to the warrant [1] an admin of one of the pedo sites claimed that Freedom Hosting had "full control" over the websites (well, he had root access to the servers, but so did OVH), was patching the websites, that the pedo site hosting was free, and that he assumed that Marques covered the hosting costs as a service to the "pedo community". Technically the prosecutors might have had to prove that he knew what the sites were hosting, but he did plead guilty. Hopefully the actual operators of the pedo sites are found and prosecuted, and not just this sysadmin.
[1] https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.247657/gov.uscourts.mdd.247657.13.1.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.247657/...
- vilhelm_s 7y agoCDA 230 immunity doesn't apply to federal crimes, only to civil lawsuits and state crimes. This was prosecuted under federal laws against child pornography, so it would not help them anyway.
- freedrock87 7y ago"According to the warrant". Take that with a grain of salt.
- rendall 7y ago"but he did plead guilty". Also take that with a grain of salt. Often plea deals create quite an incentive to plead guilt even when innocent. "Go to trial, risk 20 years in prison branded as a child porn purveyor. Or plead guilty, cooperate as a witness, we'll charge you with a lesser crime that will have you out of prison in 3 years"