3 ms·

> The website is pretty clearly operating across state lines. If the website is based in California (just made that up), runs on servers in Texas, and it allows

by davorak 12y ago

> The website is pretty clearly operating across state lines. If the website is based in California (just made that up), runs on servers in Texas, and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. A web site has to police the addresses of user base for user to user interactions? Are their examples where ebay, amazon, or similar service has to proactively police its user or suffer criminal charges for user to user interactions?

learc83 12y ago
I'm not saying that at all, my comment was addressed at the parent commenter who said that the federal government couldn't regulate prostitution unless it was part of interstate commerce. Therefore, the assumption is that the website was engaged in facilitating prostitution. The website may not have been engaged in facilitating prostitution, I have no idea. There are likely plenty of arguments to be made here (the website is just a meeting place for users, it doesn't promote prostitution etc...)--that the federal government doesn't have the power to regulate a website facilitating prostitution is not one of them.
- davorak 12y ago
  > and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. The above is really where I got the impression you were talking mainly about user to user interaction. Forum software would allow for "users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida" so the statement seemed too inclusive. Under the assumption they are facilitating what you said lines up with my understanding.
pjc50 12y ago
ebay? Absolutely. Consider the list of things you can't sell on ebay. Anyone who runs a forum has to consider their liability for their users posting illegal content, from child porn down to less serious things.
- davorak 12y ago
  > Anyone who runs a forum has to consider their liability for their users posting illegal content, from child porn down to less serious things. I have not heard of the case where the prosecutor claimed the service provider was reasonably unaware of the illegal content and pressed charges. The cases I have read concern inaction after awareness.
adzicg 12y ago
Many European gambling sites filter and self regulate users by origin country - to prohibit US users from gambling. In most countries here online gambling is legal and regulated, but there were a few cases in 2005 where US police arrested UK citizens - company directors - coming through their borders, for being involved in online gambling. As a result, most gambling operators decised it's safest to just block business from the US.
bitJericho 12y ago
Amazon collects taxes for users living in states where Amazon operates. More to your question, Amazon also has to and does collect sales tax for customers buying from third parties in which they live in the same state. I'm not aware of specifically regulated items that can be sold in one US state but not another. There are restrictions on international exports though.
JorgeJetson 12y ago
All counts of the indictment, including the money laundering, are based upon two conditions. Both must be true for any of the counts in the indictment to be judged a crime. These two conditions are: a) use of interstate mail and communications for illegal activity b) the illegal activity is specifically a violation of the California code prohibiting prostitution: facilitation of prostitution. So the federal indictment is completely dependent upon the criminal violation of a state law. However, myredbook, or its owners, have never been indictment, let alone convicted, by the State of California. This is after more than a decade of operation. Furthermore there is a federal law stating that web site owners / operators do not take any legal responsibility for the content provided by others. It does not matter if the web site owners charge or not charge these other parties for using the site. This seems to be a really really bad legal case. At minimum the feds are presuming that the owners of my redbook would be convicted of a state crime, if the state would just prosecute them. As we all know, the American legal system presumes innocence until being convicted in a court of law. So legally the feds don't seem to really have a case. All they seem to be doing is hassling the owners of myredbook with the intent of shutting the web site down. So this totally appears to be someone in the justice department driving a moral or religious agenda and not really a legal one.
- JorgeJetson 12y ago
  Here is the Federal Code that seems to be applicable: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1952 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1952 After reading this code it appears that the owners of myredbook need not be actually the people convicted of the illegal acts which are illegal by California state law. The owners of myredbook only need to facilitate the illegal acts of others. Since some posters / advertisers on myredbook have been convicted of prostitution this is likely the basis of using the California state prostitution laws in the myredbook owners federal indictment. Furthermore, since the owners of myredbook used an interstate means, the Internet, and transferred funds between banks, maybe, in different states. This would be the other basis necessary to violate the above referenced federal law. So it looks like the myredbook owners may be in pretty big trouble.
- davorak 12y ago
  > a) use of interstate mail and communications for illegal activity b) the illegal activity is specifically a violation of the California code prohibiting prostitution: facilitation of prostitution. So the federal indictment is completely dependent upon the criminal violation of a state law. However, myredbook, or its owners, have never been indictment, let alone convicted, by the State of California. This is after more than a decade of operation. Good point, it is times like this that I miss GrokLaw for dependable in-depth analysis.

by davorak 12y ago

learc83 12y ago

I'm not saying that at all, my comment was addressed at the parent commenter who said that the federal government couldn't regulate prostitution unless it was part of interstate commerce. Therefore, the assumption is that the website was engaged in facilitating prostitution. The website may not have been engaged in facilitating prostitution, I have no idea. There are likely plenty of arguments to be made here (the website is just a meeting place for users, it doesn't promote prostitution etc...)--that the federal government doesn't have the power to regulate a website facilitating prostitution is not one of them.

davorak 12y ago
> and it allows users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida, it's pretty clearly engaging in interstate commerce. The above is really where I got the impression you were talking mainly about user to user interaction. Forum software would allow for "users in Michigan to solicit sex from users in Florida" so the statement seemed too inclusive. Under the assumption they are facilitating what you said lines up with my understanding.

pjc50 12y ago

ebay? Absolutely. Consider the list of things you can't sell on ebay. Anyone who runs a forum has to consider their liability for their users posting illegal content, from child porn down to less serious things.

davorak 12y ago
> Anyone who runs a forum has to consider their liability for their users posting illegal content, from child porn down to less serious things. I have not heard of the case where the prosecutor claimed the service provider was reasonably unaware of the illegal content and pressed charges. The cases I have read concern inaction after awareness.

adzicg 12y ago

Many European gambling sites filter and self regulate users by origin country - to prohibit US users from gambling. In most countries here online gambling is legal and regulated, but there were a few cases in 2005 where US police arrested UK citizens - company directors - coming through their borders, for being involved in online gambling. As a result, most gambling operators decised it's safest to just block business from the US.

bitJericho 12y ago

Amazon collects taxes for users living in states where Amazon operates. More to your question, Amazon also has to and does collect sales tax for customers buying from third parties in which they live in the same state. I'm not aware of specifically regulated items that can be sold in one US state but not another. There are restrictions on international exports though.

JorgeJetson 12y ago

All counts of the indictment, including the money laundering, are based upon two conditions. Both must be true for any of the counts in the indictment to be judged a crime. These two conditions are: a) use of interstate mail and communications for illegal activity b) the illegal activity is specifically a violation of the California code prohibiting prostitution: facilitation of prostitution. So the federal indictment is completely dependent upon the criminal violation of a state law. However, myredbook, or its owners, have never been indictment, let alone convicted, by the State of California. This is after more than a decade of operation. Furthermore there is a federal law stating that web site owners / operators do not take any legal responsibility for the content provided by others. It does not matter if the web site owners charge or not charge these other parties for using the site. This seems to be a really really bad legal case. At minimum the feds are presuming that the owners of my redbook would be convicted of a state crime, if the state would just prosecute them. As we all know, the American legal system presumes innocence until being convicted in a court of law. So legally the feds don't seem to really have a case. All they seem to be doing is hassling the owners of myredbook with the intent of shutting the web site down. So this totally appears to be someone in the justice department driving a moral or religious agenda and not really a legal one.

JorgeJetson 12y ago
Here is the Federal Code that seems to be applicable: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1952 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1952 After reading this code it appears that the owners of myredbook need not be actually the people convicted of the illegal acts which are illegal by California state law. The owners of myredbook only need to facilitate the illegal acts of others. Since some posters / advertisers on myredbook have been convicted of prostitution this is likely the basis of using the California state prostitution laws in the myredbook owners federal indictment. Furthermore, since the owners of myredbook used an interstate means, the Internet, and transferred funds between banks, maybe, in different states. This would be the other basis necessary to violate the above referenced federal law. So it looks like the myredbook owners may be in pretty big trouble.
davorak 12y ago
> a) use of interstate mail and communications for illegal activity b) the illegal activity is specifically a violation of the California code prohibiting prostitution: facilitation of prostitution. So the federal indictment is completely dependent upon the criminal violation of a state law. However, myredbook, or its owners, have never been indictment, let alone convicted, by the State of California. This is after more than a decade of operation. Good point, it is times like this that I miss GrokLaw for dependable in-depth analysis.