Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > craiglist owners get hit by LEA for running illegal ads and services

Reply
Thread Tools

craiglist owners get hit by LEA for running illegal ads and services

 
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2009
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/05/05/c...rss_topstories


Wahhhhhhhhhh!!!


Three state Attorney Generals offices are planning on charging
craiglist owners with knowingly offering prostitution services.

In one section titled "erotic services", like duh, that needs
explanation? Ads for prostitutes in several cities can easily be
found.

The investigation was sparked by the murder of a craiglist advertiser
in a motel. Well duh. There are hundreds of crazees out there who
haunt numerous such services and may have killed others using the same
method or similar. `

Like LEA people can't find similar stuff on myspace, facebook, digg,
twitter, and other similar sites? Sheesh. I'll bet I can come up with
a hundred in no time.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Evan Platt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-05-2009
On Tue, 05 May 2009 13:50:07 -0400, richard <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Three state Attorney Generals offices are planning on charging
>craiglist owners with knowingly offering prostitution services.


Not gonna work. They've tried similar things with eBay - charging eBay
with 'selling of stolen goods' when eBay is simply a venue.

>In one section titled "erotic services", like duh, that needs
>explanation?


There's plenty of things that could fit in erotic services that have
nothing to do with prostitution. I'm sure you've participated in many,
likely under the M4M category.

>Ads for prostitutes in several cities can easily be found.


I'm sure you spent plenty of time looking.

>The investigation was sparked by the murder of a craiglist advertiser
>in a motel. Well duh. There are hundreds of crazees out there who
>haunt numerous such services and may have killed others using the same
>method or similar. `


Speaking of crazees....

>Like LEA people can't find similar stuff on myspace, facebook, digg,
>twitter, and other similar sites? Sheesh. I'll bet I can come up with
>a hundred in no time.


Yeah, I bet you've got them all bookmarked.
--
To reply via e-mail, remove The Obvious from my e-mail address.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mike Yetto
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-07-2009
Bada bing wetpixel <(E-Mail Removed)> bada bang:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, richard
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>> http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/05/05/c...?eref=rss_tops
>> tories
>>
>>
>> Wahhhhhhhhhh!!!
>>
>>
>> Three state Attorney Generals offices are planning on charging
>> craiglist owners with knowingly offering prostitution services.
>>
>> In one section titled "erotic services", like duh, that needs
>> explanation? Ads for prostitutes in several cities can easily be
>> found.
>>
>> The investigation was sparked by the murder of a craiglist advertiser
>> in a motel. Well duh. There are hundreds of crazees out there who
>> haunt numerous such services and may have killed others using the same
>> method or similar. `
>>
>> Like LEA people can't find similar stuff on myspace, facebook, digg,
>> twitter, and other similar sites? Sheesh. I'll bet I can come up with
>> a hundred in no time.
>>

>
> Maybe the concept isn't clear:
> It doesn't matter if you think it's common, or if other people might do
> it. It is illegal to participate in criminal activity by helping to
> promote it.
>
> "But that guy did it" just doesn't make any difference, not legally and
> not socially.
>
> If you are correct that twitter helps make criminal activities happen
> (by providing something for them to do it), then they should also be
> prosecuted. There is no reason not to prosecute, Richard.


From the Electronic Frontier Foundation's response to another
attempt to hold Craigslist liable:

'Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996,
immunizes providers of "interactive computer service" such as
Craigslist -- website operators, ISPs, domain name registrars --
from state criminal liability for content posted by third
parties.'

Mike "no grounds for prosecution" Yetto
--
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitas.
- William of Ockham
 
Reply With Quote
 
G. Morgan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-07-2009
richard wrote:

>Three state Attorney Generals offices are planning on charging
>craiglist owners with knowingly offering prostitution services.


Yeah, that's pretty stupid. Are they also going to outlaw phone books because
they have the "Escorts" section?

This knee-jerk reaction is what politicians use to get themselves some free
publicity. This reminds me of the asshole DA in NY that caused all the major
ISP's to get rid of USENET.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bucky Breeder
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-07-2009
richard <(E-Mail Removed)> perpetrated this via
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/05/05/c....html?eref=rss
> _topstories
>
>
> Wahhhhhhhhhh!!!
>
>
> Three state Attorney Generals offices are planning on charging
> craiglist owners with knowingly offering prostitution services.
>
> In one section titled "erotic services", like duh, that needs
> explanation? Ads for prostitutes in several cities can easily be
> found.
>
> The investigation was sparked by the murder of a craiglist advertiser
> in a motel. Well duh. There are hundreds of crazees out there who
> haunt numerous such services and may have killed others using the same
> method or similar. `
>
> Like LEA people can't find similar stuff on myspace, facebook, digg,
> twitter, and other similar sites? Sheesh. I'll bet I can come up with
> a hundred in no time.


They ought to get 'em for false advertising too - because everytime
I'm out of town and the girl shows up - she don't look nothin' like
her picture.

I say "Hey! Whaat are *YOU* -- the girl's mama?"

But that's a whole nuther story...

--

I am Bucky Breeder, (*(^; , and whilst my huge stimulus package
may not save the US economy; it sure makes the wimmins happy!

Pay your taxes to keep US torture tactics immune from prosecution:

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/.../hopenosis.gif

Repent! The end is near.... So, smoke 'em if you got 'em.
 
Reply With Quote
 
XS11E
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-07-2009
G. Morgan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> This knee-jerk reaction is what politicians use to get themselves
> some free publicity.


Agree so far but...

> This reminds me of the asshole DA in NY that caused all the major
> ISP's to get rid of USENET.


Now I have to disagree. ISPs were looking for way to raise fees w/o
losing customers, suddenly they were handed a great excuse for a cost
cutting measure, they dropped Usenet, didn't have to raise fees and
told the customers it was an improvement to the ISP's services because
the customers were being protected from kiddie porn!

It was a very slick way for the ISPs to increase income w/o raising
prices or losing customers!

The DA in NY didn't 'cause' anything, he merely gave the ISPs an
excuse!


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
G. Morgan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-07-2009
XS11E wrote:

>The DA in NY didn't 'cause' anything, he merely gave the ISPs an
>excuse!


Well, true. That is a more accurate portrayal.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Yetto
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2009
Bada bing wetpixel <(E-Mail Removed)> bada bang:
> In article
><(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, Mike
> Yetto <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> > If you are correct that twitter helps make criminal activities happen
>> > (by providing something for them to do it), then they should also be
>> > prosecuted. There is no reason not to prosecute, Richard.

>>
>> From the Electronic Frontier Foundation's response to another
>> attempt to hold Craigslist liable:
>>
>> 'Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996,
>> immunizes providers of "interactive computer service" such as
>> Craigslist -- website operators, ISPs, domain name registrars --
>> from state criminal liability for content posted by third
>> parties.'
>>
>> Mike "no grounds for prosecution" Yetto

>
> "Content"
> But Craigslist provided a place and implied consent to post such
> notices -- which is much more than unknowingly having content put on
> their site without their help.
>


They only transfer the content, they do not create or edit it.
Would your mail-carrier be resposible for delivering a
threatening letter?

> "Third parties" doesn't really protect them much, either -- it means
> that if the craigslist people have any knowledge of a person's intent
> to commit any inappropriate act, they may have complicity.
>


The safe-harbour provision most certainly does. That was its
intent.

> More than that, if they don't allow a place to post prostitution ads,
> those may end up somewhere else on the site, which might mean turning
> uninterested people (almost all of us, I'm sure) away from using
> craigslist.
>
> There are a lot more aspects to this than just saying the literal and
> technical liability is supposed to be nil. Assuming a judge would agree
> that the Section 230 above applied and covered the situation, of
> course.


Judges have agree to this provision and actually must do so. It
is the law.

Mike "no safe-harbour, no web" Yetto
--
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitas.
- William of Ockham
 
Reply With Quote
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2009
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 21:42:47 -1000, wetpixel <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>In article
><(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, Mike
>Yetto <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> > If you are correct that twitter helps make criminal activities happen
>> > (by providing something for them to do it), then they should also be
>> > prosecuted. There is no reason not to prosecute, Richard.

>>
>> From the Electronic Frontier Foundation's response to another
>> attempt to hold Craigslist liable:
>>
>> 'Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996,
>> immunizes providers of "interactive computer service" such as
>> Craigslist -- website operators, ISPs, domain name registrars --
>> from state criminal liability for content posted by third
>> parties.'
>>
>> Mike "no grounds for prosecution" Yetto

>
>"Content"
>But Craigslist provided a place and implied consent to post such
>notices -- which is much more than unknowingly having content put on
>their site without their help.
>
>"Third parties" doesn't really protect them much, either -- it means
>that if the craigslist people have any knowledge of a person's intent
>to commit any inappropriate act, they may have complicity.
>
>More than that, if they don't allow a place to post prostitution ads,
>those may end up somewhere else on the site, which might mean turning
>uninterested people (almost all of us, I'm sure) away from using
>craigslist.
>
>There are a lot more aspects to this than just saying the literal and
>technical liability is supposed to be nil. Assuming a judge would agree
>that the Section 230 above applied and covered the situation, of
>course.



If the owners of craiglist fail to remove illegal ads and services,
then they could possibly be held criminally liable. At least ebay
takes down any illegal content.

Dennis Vaco, predecessor of Major Cuomo of NY, once tried filing
charges against two usenet services for harboring child pornography.
He lost the cases.

If craiglist fails to remove the illegal ads, then they should be
prosecuted.
 
Reply With Quote
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2009
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:17:39 -0400, Mike Yetto <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Bada bing wetpixel <(E-Mail Removed)> bada bang:
>> In article
>><(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, Mike
>> Yetto <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> > If you are correct that twitter helps make criminal activities happen
>>> > (by providing something for them to do it), then they should also be
>>> > prosecuted. There is no reason not to prosecute, Richard.
>>>
>>> From the Electronic Frontier Foundation's response to another
>>> attempt to hold Craigslist liable:
>>>
>>> 'Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996,
>>> immunizes providers of "interactive computer service" such as
>>> Craigslist -- website operators, ISPs, domain name registrars --
>>> from state criminal liability for content posted by third
>>> parties.'
>>>
>>> Mike "no grounds for prosecution" Yetto

>>
>> "Content"
>> But Craigslist provided a place and implied consent to post such
>> notices -- which is much more than unknowingly having content put on
>> their site without their help.
>>

>
>They only transfer the content, they do not create or edit it.
>Would your mail-carrier be resposible for delivering a
>threatening letter?


No but it's illegal to use the US mail for that purpose.
>
>> "Third parties" doesn't really protect them much, either -- it means
>> that if the craigslist people have any knowledge of a person's intent
>> to commit any inappropriate act, they may have complicity.
>>

>
>The safe-harbour provision most certainly does. That was its
>intent.


As long as the owner does his part and removes what is illegal.

>
>> More than that, if they don't allow a place to post prostitution ads,
>> those may end up somewhere else on the site, which might mean turning
>> uninterested people (almost all of us, I'm sure) away from using
>> craigslist.
>>
>> There are a lot more aspects to this than just saying the literal and
>> technical liability is supposed to be nil. Assuming a judge would agree
>> that the Section 230 above applied and covered the situation, of
>> course.

>
>Judges have agree to this provision and actually must do so. It
>is the law.
>
>Mike "no safe-harbour, no web" Yetto

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
craiglist question richard Computer Support 7 09-06-2010 08:32 PM
How to search Craiglist system wide? me@privacy.net Computer Support 2 03-12-2008 09:04 PM
Can't hit the site by name but I can hit by IP CK ASP .Net 9 10-19-2006 08:01 PM
SSH Tunneling and the LEA jaffy james Computer Security 2 02-17-2004 05:09 AM



Advertisments