4 ms·

If your answer is “you”, then it follows that OpenAI should face felony CFAA charges for the Hugging Face intrusion. Right?

by teeray 2mo ago

scarmig 2mo ago
Yes. Otherwise, you open the door for every criminal to use "oopsie" as their defense.
- lupire 2mo ago
  There is centuries old legal doctrine on the subtleties of criminal intent and negligence and liability. You didn't discover a gotcha that thousands of lawyers never noticed.
- throwawaysleep 2mo ago
  But it is currently a strong mitigating factor. The law is full of oopsie defenses.
eqvinox 2mo ago
Yes, and they absolutely should.
LoganDark 2mo ago
Only if HuggingFace chooses to press them though.
- OkayPhysicist 2mo ago
  That is not how the legal system works in the US. Criminal charges are brought by the State, not the victim. The only exception is in 6 states (Kansas, New Mexico, North Dakota, Nebraska, Nevada, and Oklahoma) where a sufficiently large group of civilians can compel the courts to form a grand jury (think a couple hundred people). Still isn't the victim bringing charges.
  - triceratops 2mo ago
    Typically you need the victim's cooperation. The victim isn't obligated to provide logs or other forensic information to help the prosecution. (I mean I guess the prosecution could subpoena them. But then the defence could use that fact to sway the jury "See? Even the alleged victim doesn't care, so was there even really a crime?" IANAL just a fan of legal thrillers) When people say "press charges" that's what they actually mean.
    - watwut 2mo ago
      > The victim isn't obligated to provide logs or other forensic information to help the prosecution. Yes they are, just like in any other criminal case.
      - triceratops 2mo ago
        How does the prosecutor make the victim do it if they don't want to?
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        vrighter 2mo ago
        a crime is investigated by law enforcement. If you do decide to withhold evidence as the victim, you could still be charged with obstruction of justice. In a criminal case, the victim is not the prosecution, but just a witness. It is not up to any witness whether the case should proceed or not.
        triceratops 2mo ago
        > If you do decide to withhold evidence as the victim, you could still be charged with obstruction of justice Do you have examples of this happening? I'm very skeptical. Prosecutors are political animals. Prosecuting a crime victim just feels like a losing position. If "testify or jail" worked you wouldn't need witness protection programs. > It is not up to any witness whether the case should proceed or not. No doubt. Best example: homicide. Always investigated and prosecuted even though the victim isn't around. But say your house is burgled. Your neighbor, a cop, knows it happened. If you refuse to let investigators in to dust for fingerprints, will the case go anywhere? Will the DA really charge you with obstruction?

If your answer is “you”, then it follows that OpenAI should face felony CFAA charges for the Hugging Face intrusion. Right?

by teeray 2mo ago

If your answer is “you”, then it follows that OpenAI should face felony CFAA charges for the Hugging Face intrusion. Right?

scarmig 2mo ago

Yes. Otherwise, you open the door for every criminal to use "oopsie" as their defense.

lupire 2mo ago
There is centuries old legal doctrine on the subtleties of criminal intent and negligence and liability. You didn't discover a gotcha that thousands of lawyers never noticed.
throwawaysleep 2mo ago
But it is currently a strong mitigating factor. The law is full of oopsie defenses.

eqvinox 2mo ago

Yes, and they absolutely should.

LoganDark 2mo ago

Only if HuggingFace chooses to press them though.

OkayPhysicist 2mo ago
That is not how the legal system works in the US. Criminal charges are brought by the State, not the victim. The only exception is in 6 states (Kansas, New Mexico, North Dakota, Nebraska, Nevada, and Oklahoma) where a sufficiently large group of civilians can compel the courts to form a grand jury (think a couple hundred people). Still isn't the victim bringing charges.
- triceratops 2mo ago
  Typically you need the victim's cooperation. The victim isn't obligated to provide logs or other forensic information to help the prosecution. (I mean I guess the prosecution could subpoena them. But then the defence could use that fact to sway the jury "See? Even the alleged victim doesn't care, so was there even really a crime?" IANAL just a fan of legal thrillers) When people say "press charges" that's what they actually mean.
  - watwut 2mo ago
    > The victim isn't obligated to provide logs or other forensic information to help the prosecution. Yes they are, just like in any other criminal case.
    - triceratops 2mo ago
      How does the prosecutor make the victim do it if they don't want to?
      - deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
      - vrighter 2mo ago
        a crime is investigated by law enforcement. If you do decide to withhold evidence as the victim, you could still be charged with obstruction of justice. In a criminal case, the victim is not the prosecution, but just a witness. It is not up to any witness whether the case should proceed or not.
        triceratops 2mo ago
        > If you do decide to withhold evidence as the victim, you could still be charged with obstruction of justice Do you have examples of this happening? I'm very skeptical. Prosecutors are political animals. Prosecuting a crime victim just feels like a losing position. If "testify or jail" worked you wouldn't need witness protection programs. > It is not up to any witness whether the case should proceed or not. No doubt. Best example: homicide. Always investigated and prosecuted even though the victim isn't around. But say your house is burgled. Your neighbor, a cop, knows it happened. If you refuse to let investigators in to dust for fingerprints, will the case go anywhere? Will the DA really charge you with obstruction?