dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
8
share rss forum feed
« ummmWhere do we stop? »
This is a sub-selection from Courts

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to vpoko

Re: Courts

Actually no you do not have to know. Such as what I started with the 7-11 story. If the driver has no clue a murder is being done while waiting on friend, said driver can be charged and normally is for murder even though he was in the car. Courts have been doing that for YEARS and it works for the courts. That is my basis on this subject. Regardless if the HSI account holder knows or not, under US Law, they should charged/sued. it doesn't make sense for it to happen in one case and not another.

Trencher

join:2007-02-12
Etobicoke, ON
So if were at a shooting range and I loan you my gun to shoot at the range and you accidentally shoot someone, will I get charged for letting you use that gun? Most likely not.... So it kinda goes against your original analogy.

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
Not the same as the others.


JackKane

@covad.net
reply to Trencher
Actually, yes. In a case where you lend your car to someone, even if they have appropriate insurance (as does your vehicle), an accident victim could go after the vehicle owner and his assets. It's not criminal, but they could claim negligence and given good lawyering, they would win.

At a gun range people sign waivers, but basically an owner of an item could be found negligent even if he did not commit the crime. With HSI, there is a contract between the user and the ISP that you will not hold them liable for any of your actions (there may be Safe Harbor laws and so forth, I don't know the details). There are no contracts between your open hotspot and anonymous users, and it's likely to be a violation of your contract to willfully allow others to use your connection. Best defense would be ignorance, I would think.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc:

Actually no you do not have to know. Such as what I started with the 7-11 story. If the driver has no clue a murder is being done while waiting on friend, said driver can be charged and normally is for murder even though he was in the car.

Can you cite case law?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06
reply to hottboiinnc
Yeah, charging someone for a crime they didn't commit is never right. The courts can do something for years like enforce slavery and still be dead wrong.


vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA
reply to hottboiinnc
I'd be very curious to see a reference for this case. The principle of mens rea requires that one have knowledge of the act (though not necessarily the law) to be criminally charged. It's a bit more lax with civil law, but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts there was more to the 7-11 case than you think.


dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus

join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to hottboiinnc
Of course you can charge them. But that is based on the courts accepting that you can actually prove that they knew about the activity. You can not be convicted of murder when it is proven that you had no idea what was going on.

No different that the courts allowing this case to be brought. Based on the supposition that they can prove the WiFi owner had some knowledge or otherwise responsibility. Which they seem to be failing to prove.
--
dnoyeB
"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard. " Ecclesiastes 9:16