There's a clause in the DMCA that states that websites that don't know what files their users upload can't be held accountable for the actions of their users. It's called Safe Harbor provisions.
Oh, right, that makes sense.
What if he did not know of any specific crimes being committed? It's obvious that he and everyone else knew it was being used for illegal purposes, but what if he did not know any details about any of them, in specific? Could he still be charged as an accessory to crimes he did not actually know about, just because he easily could have, but chose not to?
Linking what Maz mentioned.
So in order to fall under this, he would have had to implemented a system for terminating accounts.The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has notable safe-harbor provisions which protect Internet service providers from the consequences of their users' actions. (Similarly, the EU directive on electronic commerce provides a similar provision of "mere conduit" which, while not exactly the same, serves much the same function as the DMCA safe harbor in this instance.) The US Patent and Trademark Briefing on ISP Liability states that in order to be eligible for safe harbor, the ISP must have adopted and reasonably implemented a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network who are repeat infringers.
Those aren't federal laws. This guy is facing federal charges. His argument is regarding federal laws.
not really. I'm still held to federal drug laws as a landlord. there might be some grey area in Colorado with this issue now but that's about it. you are breaking federal laws if your selling say cocaine and if its being done on my property and someone gets hurt or killed I'm screwed. I can be held liable in both civil and criminal court. so this guys defense is awful.
this is right off the town website for where I apply for the permit to rent my accessory apt which is a section of my house. the town sends the fire marshal once a year to inspect my entire house and make sure there is nothing illegal going on.
the landlord may face fines stemming from various federal, state, city or local laws that are designed to prevent landlords from having criminal activity take place in their rental properties.
Any person that is injured or otherwise bothered by drugs sold in a landlord's rental properties -- be it another tenant or someone in the community -- may sue the landlord, claiming that the rental property has become a public nuisance or poses a danger to the community.
The police or other law enforcement officers may try to impose criminal liability on the landlord if the landlord allowed drug dealing on the rental property. The government may seize the landlord's rental property and other assets, in extreme cases.
one time I had a guy offer me 14k up front in cash for the year. who the fuck pays 14k up front except people with no bank account/credit that sell drugs? even illegal aliens don't pay cash up front for the year. only people who are up to no good do that. I turned him down cause I was sure he was a drug dealer.
Accessory? Conspirator?
"oh, whats that pile of white powder in your basement? Sugar, oh ok, nothing to see here folks"
This isnt the first time you've supported really stupid arguments for the sake of trolling. How do you choose not to be aware? So you just shut down your senses? Are you a cyborg and you can manipulate your memory? Are you a fucking retard who cant put 1+1 together?
some people will always choose to be ignorant, or support false points, or half true points because doing so not only allows them to use the same ignorant excuse if they get caught doing something, but it many cases it also supports their ideology that say drugs are good and the cops are bad and the big bad USA government is out of control. and while in some cases this might be true, this isn't one. this is something the gov should have gone after.
Hey, if you can show me a landlord getting federally prosecuted for drug crimes that his tenants were perpetrating, I'll totally agree with you that his defense is completely terrible.
(his defense isn't great, and I don't think it will be successful because the analogy is flawed, but his argument is that federal laws have not previously targeted landlords for their tenants behavior like this - I do not know if that is correct)
hey arch i don't know of any ether. i just know that they can if they want to because i own property that i rent so i have looked into this stuff. if they do or not is a differernt story. i would bet that its a case by case basis. i would also bet that if a landlord was proved to be profiting off such sales his assets would be siezed and they would be charged. this guy was making commision off every sale was he not?
pretty much every thing i have looked at for landlord criminal and civil liability for drug dealing by a tenant says that this can happen but none give any examples or case studies.
my other question is did he pay income tax on this money?
I mean, they're legit looking at this guy for hiring a hitman, he's got a little more to worry about than being a digital landlord lol
true strike my man. crazy ppl were looking for hitmen on that site.
What, exactly, makes bitcoins property of value that requires IRS reporting, but FFXI Gil not?
This seems like kind of a silly question, but...is it? You use a computer to create things that have exchange rates to USD...what's the difference?
The IRS hasn't said ffxi gil is taxable, i guess.
Next they will come for your SoJs!
Fuckin shit, I met this dude in Puerto Rico in 09, DPR 2.0 follows me on Twitter. RIP Defcon...
http://www.businessinsider.com/who-i...nthall-2014-11
So I hear there's rumors going around that the FBI was DDoSing networks and doing other malicious shit to break the connections of the exit nodes and force them to reconnect to nodes owned by the FBI, obviously we'll never know how they did it because freedom means the government never divulging that info to us! :D