Quote:
Originally Posted by molson
You'd have to look up the criminal statute at issue. It won't give you a %, but it will tell you what's a illegal. The courts, through caselaw, have established what isn't a crime, and what is a crime. Everything in between in open to argument (there's lots of grey area in law).
And while a % would be nice to know, that's not realistic. It's more than %, that's just one factor. Two websites with 10% prostitution or drugs may have varying guilt if they vary in overt support for the criminal action/efforts to combat criminal activity.
With Pirate Bay it's easy. 99% illegal stuff, which is supported, defended, faciliated, and profitted from. Google is easy on the other side, being legal. Craiglist, definitely legal, but they could easily drift into dangerous waters if they were too lax on prostitution.
|
So, I take it from what you've been saying that you think that the onus of ensuring that no illegal activity is taking place on a website should be that website's responsibility? I'm willing to buy that if an appropriate authority (either the police, or a copyright holder) alerts someone to illegal activity on their site they should have a responsibility to remove it, but I'm not sure they should have to keep vigilant watch to make sure its never put up in the first place. I have to admit I've got a bit of libertarian streak in general, and especially when it comes to the internet.