BFL subpoena - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 12:17:58 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 19, 2015, 12:04:21 PM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 11:59:28 AM

Quote from: Blazr on April 19, 2015, 09:04:33 AM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 08:11:55 AM

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud.

By that same logic, if your Bitcoin node relayed a fraudulent transaction it received it would be a vehicle for fraud, therefore it's safe to assume every Bitcoin user running a node is just as guilty as theymos as undoubtedly every Bitcoin node has relayed a fraudulent transaction.

We're not discussing logic or how things should be, had we our way. We're talking about US laws. US laws do not allow US person to run websites where people sell CI drugs, or promoting unregistered securities. This is basic stuff.

Quote

Thankfully the law doesn't work that way and there are laws in place designed to protect website owners from the actions of their users, which is why craigslist's owners aren't in jail for the actions of people like the Craigslist Killer.

If Craigslist operators knew the ad was placed by a murderer, were informed, on multiple occasions, that the guy was killing people, and refused to take down the ad? You can be absolutely certain they'd be jailed.

Further, if most of the ads on Craigslist were made by killers, putting a disclaimer along the lines of...

or, rather, "We do not remove ads by likely killers. Thus far, it appears that roughly 95% of these ads have proven to have been placed by confirmed murderers. Use your head." just wouldn't cut the mustard Undecided

The forum has instituted a policy to generally not look into the various deals that people are considering to make. As a result it does not know if something is a scam or not. A similar thing can be said about unregistered securities as the forum does not verify that something that could be considered to be a security is properly registered.

Such policy is simply illegal in US. As I already have pointed out, "If Craigslist operators knew the ad was placed by a murderer, were informed, on multiple occasions, that the guy was killing people, and refused to take down the ad? You can be absolutely certain they'd be jailed." That's what is being discussed - users alerting Theymos of a crime taking place, and Theymos refusing to act because policy.

Why don't you cite the law that makes this policy illegal? Section 230 of the Communications Decency act protects the owners of a website who publish information provided by others.

There have been a number of court cases involving ponzis on the forum and theymos (or the forum) were not held liable

IPO Magic

full member

Activity: 138

Merit: 100

Quote from: Quickseller on April 19, 2015, 12:04:21 PM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 11:59:28 AM

Quote from: Blazr on April 19, 2015, 09:04:33 AM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 08:11:55 AM

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud.

By that same logic, if your Bitcoin node relayed a fraudulent transaction it received it would be a vehicle for fraud, therefore it's safe to assume every Bitcoin user running a node is just as guilty as theymos as undoubtedly every Bitcoin node has relayed a fraudulent transaction.

We're not discussing logic or how things should be, had we our way. We're talking about US laws. US laws do not allow US person to run websites where people sell CI drugs, or promoting unregistered securities. This is basic stuff.

Quote

Thankfully the law doesn't work that way and there are laws in place designed to protect website owners from the actions of their users, which is why craigslist's owners aren't in jail for the actions of people like the Craigslist Killer.

If Craigslist operators knew the ad was placed by a murderer, were informed, on multiple occasions, that the guy was killing people, and refused to take down the ad? You can be absolutely certain they'd be jailed.

Further, if most of the ads on Craigslist were made by killers, putting a disclaimer along the lines of...

or, rather, "We do not remove ads by likely killers. Thus far, it appears that roughly 95% of these ads have proven to have been placed by confirmed murderers. Use your head." just wouldn't cut the mustard Undecided

The forum has instituted a policy to generally not look into the various deals that people are considering to make. As a result it does not know if something is a scam or not. A similar thing can be said about unregistered securities as the forum does not verify that something that could be considered to be a security is properly registered.

Such policy is simply illegal in US. As I already have pointed out, "If Craigslist operators knew the ad was placed by a murderer, were informed, on multiple occasions, that the guy was killing people, and refused to take down the ad? You can be absolutely certain they'd be jailed." That's what is being discussed - users alerting Theymos of a crime taking place, and Theymos refusing to act because policy.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 11:59:28 AM

Quote from: Blazr on April 19, 2015, 09:04:33 AM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 08:11:55 AM

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud.

By that same logic, if your Bitcoin node relayed a fraudulent transaction it received it would be a vehicle for fraud, therefore it's safe to assume every Bitcoin user running a node is just as guilty as theymos as undoubtedly every Bitcoin node has relayed a fraudulent transaction.

We're not discussing logic or how things should be, had we our way. We're talking about US laws. US laws do not allow US person to run websites where people sell CI drugs, or promoting unregistered securities. This is basic stuff.

Quote

Thankfully the law doesn't work that way and there are laws in place designed to protect website owners from the actions of their users, which is why craigslist's owners aren't in jail for the actions of people like the Craigslist Killer.

If Craigslist operators knew the ad was placed by a murderer, were informed, on multiple occasions, that the guy was killing people, and refused to take down the ad? You can be absolutely certain they'd be jailed.

Further, if most of the ads on Craigslist were made by killers, putting a disclaimer along the lines of...

or, rather, "We do not remove ads by likely killers. Thus far, it appears that roughly 95% of these ads have proven to have been placed by confirmed murderers. Use your head." just wouldn't cut the mustard Undecided

The forum has instituted a policy to generally not look into the various deals that people are considering to make. As a result it does not know if something is a scam or not. A similar thing can be said about unregistered securities as the forum does not verify that something that could be considered to be a security is properly registered.

The only real way that CL can *know* that a specific person is using CL to find victims to kill is if the killer is actually convicted (and would most likely in be jail), otherwise it would just be speculation

IPO Magic

full member

Activity: 138

Merit: 100

Quote from: Blazr on April 19, 2015, 09:04:33 AM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 08:11:55 AM

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud.

By that same logic, if your Bitcoin node relayed a fraudulent transaction it received it would be a vehicle for fraud, therefore it's safe to assume every Bitcoin user running a node is just as guilty as theymos as undoubtedly every Bitcoin node has relayed a fraudulent transaction.

We're not discussing logic or how things should be, had we our way. We're talking about US laws. US laws do not allow US person to run websites where people sell CI drugs, or promoting unregistered securities. The fact that such practices may be perfectly legal in Liberland is irrelevant. This is basic stuff.

Quote

Thankfully the law doesn't work that way and there are laws in place designed to protect website owners from the actions of their users, which is why craigslist's owners aren't in jail for the actions of people like the Craigslist Killer.

If Craigslist operators knew the ad was placed by a murderer, were informed, on multiple occasions, that the guy was killing people, and refused to take down the ad? You can be absolutely certain they'd be jailed.

Further, if most of the ads on Craigslist were made by killers, putting a disclaimer along the lines of...

or, rather, "We do not remove ads by likely killers. Thus far, it appears that roughly 95% of these ads have proven to have been placed by confirmed murderers. Use your head." just wouldn't cut the mustard Undecided

But, again, we're not talking about logic, we're talking about US law.

sbogovac

legendary

Activity: 2744

Merit: 1193

I don't believe in denial.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 19, 2015, 10:33:58 AM

Quote from: DeboraMeeks on April 19, 2015, 05:46:14 AM

To prevent this sort of thing happening in future why doesn't theymos cede control of the forum to someone he trusts who lives in Russia or Belize or wherever, and who is willing to ignore such subpoenas?

Why? It's not the responsibility of theymos to make sure the users of this forum are decent honest people. It's also not his responsibility to protect forum users from the law. He's a forum administrator not a mommy or a nanny. He only has one job duty on this forum and only owes one thing to its membership - keep the forum running. There are a bunch of little jobs inside that one duty like keep the spam down, ban the disruptive people, pay for the hosting, update the software, bla bla. Nowhere in that duty list does it say, keep members from being ripped off and hide them from the law.

It does however "say": provide information to people who request it formally and with good reason... If Theymos had seen this as 'no good reason' (which in part he did) he's free to protest (which he did succesfully)...

sbogovac

legendary

Activity: 2744

Merit: 1193

I don't believe in denial.

Quote from: Blazr on April 19, 2015, 09:04:33 AM

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 08:11:55 AM

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud.

By that same logic, if your Bitcoin node relayed a fraudulent transaction it received it would be a vehicle for fraud, therefore it's safe to assume every Bitcoin user running a node is just as guilty as theymos as undoubtedly every Bitcoin node has relayed a fraudulent transaction.

Thankfully the law doesn't work that way and there are laws in place designed to protect website owners from the actions of their users, which is why craigslist's owners aren't in jail for the actions of people like the Craigslist Killer.

Yes, indeed. Exactly why Craigslist provides infomation to anyone requesting formally; either private/through a lawyer because they've been ripped off or by government LEO's trying to catch criminals...

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: DeboraMeeks on April 19, 2015, 05:46:14 AM

To prevent this sort of thing happening in future why doesn't theymos cede control of the forum to someone he trusts who lives in Russia or Belize or wherever, and who is willing to ignore such subpoenas?

Because the last entity you want to piss off is the US Government. If you stick your fingers up at them they'll find a way to insert them into you. While we all agree that bitcointalk.org shouldn't have been subject to such sweeping requests for information, there is little reason to start a war over it.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: DeboraMeeks on April 19, 2015, 05:46:14 AM

To prevent this sort of thing happening in future why doesn't theymos cede control of the forum to someone he trusts who lives in Russia or Belize or wherever, and who is willing to ignore such subpoenas?

Why? It's not the responsibility of theymos to make sure the users of this forum are decent honest people. It's also not his responsibility to protect forum users from the law. He's a forum administrator not a mommy or a nanny. He only has one job duty on this forum and only owes one thing to its membership - keep the forum running. There are a bunch of little jobs inside that one duty like keep the spam down, ban the disruptive people, pay for the hosting, update the software, bla bla. Nowhere in that duty list does it say, keep members from being ripped off and hide them from the law.

Blazr

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1006

Quote from: IPO Magic on April 19, 2015, 08:11:55 AM

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud.

By that same logic, if your Bitcoin node relayed a fraudulent transaction it received it would be a vehicle for fraud, therefore it's safe to assume every Bitcoin user running a node is just as guilty as theymos as undoubtedly every Bitcoin node has relayed a fraudulent transaction.

Thankfully the law doesn't work that way and there are laws in place designed to protect website owners from the actions of their users, which is why craigslist's owners aren't in jail for the actions of people like the Craigslist Killer.

IPO Magic

full member

Activity: 138

Merit: 100

Quote from: Quickseller on April 19, 2015, 01:18:40 AM

Quote from: Bicknellski on April 19, 2015, 01:10:25 AM

Quote from: unamis76 on April 18, 2015, 03:33:29 PM

I'm surprised that BFL is such a small part of the forum. I was about to suggest you should just give them yesterday's forum snapshot Grin

Jokes aside... What the hell do we have to do with BFL? Why the hell should theymos be forced to lose time gathering all the information these guys need? If they need info, get them yourselves... Don't force your own citizens to work for you for free, gathering old information they have nothing to do about and sending them in if they don't bow to this... Pretty annoying.

As for the PM protection... I agree with Blazr. Losing your password would be a feature. But this also should be opt-in, with a big, annoying, one time warning.

Ignoring scams leads to this. Being proactive could resolve it simply banning BFL in 2012 or 2013 as things escalated. If you don't want to bother doing hours of info collation then eliminate the scammers sooner and permanently. No remorse here this subpoena has happened. It will happen again without any proactive measures by admins.

Scams are not banned. Unless some other rule was broken during that timeframe (I have no idea if one was, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that one was not) then a ban would not have been appropriate.

A disclaimer stating that scams are not banned doesn't absolve the forum from responsibility of being a vehicle for fraud. Scams are banned in US. Theymos is a US citizen, operating from US soil, regardless of where the servers are physically located, and is subject to US law.

@DeboraMeeks: And control of $ million + in BTC? Not gonna happen.

DeboraMeeks

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

To prevent this sort of thing happening in future why doesn't theymos cede control of the forum to someone he trusts who lives in Russia or Belize or wherever, and who is willing to ignore such subpoenas?

sbogovac

legendary

Activity: 2744

Merit: 1193

I don't believe in denial.

Quote from: unamis76 on April 19, 2015, 05:24:45 AM

[...]

Any normal "rule-of-law" country should have these kind of laws. If a forum provides the ability for people to meet and transact, the both parties should be able to collect enough information to settle disputes (especially if one of those parties is conducting "business" the way BFL has done)... Or would you prefer the "wild west" where the "law of the strongest/richest/cunnyest applies?

unamis76

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1012

Quote from: redsn0w on April 18, 2015, 03:40:27 PM

Quote from: unamis76 on April 18, 2015, 03:33:29 PM

I'm surprised that BFL is such a small part of the forum. I was about to suggest you should just give them yesterday's forum snapshot Grin

Jokes aside... What the hell do we have to do with BFL? Why the hell should theymos be forced to lose time gathering all the information these guys need? If they need info, get them yourselves... Don't force your own citizens to work for you for free, gathering old information they have nothing to do about and sending them in if they don't bow to this... Pretty annoying.

As for the PM protection... I agree with Blazr. Losing your password would be a feature. But this also should be opt-in, with a big, annoying, one time warning.

I have asked the 'same' thing and this is was the reply from BadBear:

Quote from: BadBear on April 17, 2015, 06:33:28 AM

Subpoena is a court order, so yes he has to respond (either consent or fight it in court) or he can be jailed.

And yes you should always use PGP or something else for sensitive communications.

I hope they enjoy reading my pm's to Inaba warning him to stop trolling and derailing threads, and him whining about someone else starting it.

I was lucky to have not sent any 'sensitive' pm to any 'member' of BFL team or person related with them.

Of course he has to respond, that's how their laws are made... But they shouldn't have sent the subpoena in the first place: this is not the BFL forums neither is theymos involved with BFL

We shouldn't have to waste time dealing with other people's problems. Being a forum admin doesn't include that responsibility. Or at least it shouldn't.

I guess they're just going to ask to all admins of websites where criminals have gone through to release their info Roll Eyes

Quote from: Bicknellski on April 19, 2015, 01:10:25 AM

Ignoring scams leads to this. Being proactive could resolve it simply banning BFL in 2012 or 2013 as things escalated. If you don't want to bother doing hours of info collation then eliminate the scammers sooner and permanently. No remorse here this subpoena has happened. It will happen again without any proactive measures by admins.

Ignoring scams leads to many precedents, which don't really make sense around here, in my opinion. That's why there are forum parts where there are red letters saying that possible scams are not removed.

As far as I know, theymos position around here is being neutral (as you can read by his interview posted earlier in the thread). Removing sensitive things doesn't really make him neutral. I think that wouldn't be good for his image and, most importantly, to the image of the forum. Removing things makes admins and mods look like they're on one side of the fence, and I wouldn't like to visit a forum where admins remove things that may (or may not) be a scam. That's up to us to see what's up (and we're a pretty smart community around here)

erikalui

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1094

Quote from: VenusFlyTrap on April 18, 2015, 07:12:01 PM

Quote from: erikalui on April 18, 2015, 01:31:12 PM

I just found this: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=176216470&z=77fe495b

And this http://ia801803.us.archive.org/33/items/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083.68.1.pdf

We have been following this for months. Where have you been dude? Look at the other BFL threads.

I was alive but not that alive to read about something I don't know about nor am interested in bro. I dint know the term BFL till this post was created. I can't search every section of this forum to find out what's going on and I don't even know anyone who could tell me about this case. and also it's pretty obvious that what you might know, I might not and vice versa. Not surprising at all.

What other BFL thread? Aren't they all deleted?

Quote from: redsn0w on April 18, 2015, 03:40:27 PM

Quote from: unamis76 on April 18, 2015, 03:33:29 PM

I'm surprised that BFL is such a small part of the forum. I was about to suggest you should just give them yesterday's forum snapshot Grin

Jokes aside... What the hell do we have to do with BFL? Why the hell should theymos be forced to lose time gathering all the information these guys need? If they need info, get them yourselves... Don't force your own citizens to work for you for free, gathering old information they have nothing to do about and sending them in if they don't bow to this... Pretty annoying.

As for the PM protection... I agree with Blazr. Losing your password would be a feature. But this also should be opt-in, with a big, annoying, one time warning.

I have asked the 'same' thing and this is was the reply from BadBear:

Quote from: BadBear on April 17, 2015, 06:33:28 AM

Subpoena is a court order, so yes he has to respond (either consent or fight it in court) or he can be jailed.

And yes you should always use PGP or something else for sensitive communications.

I hope they enjoy reading my pm's to Inaba warning him to stop trolling and derailing threads, and him whining about someone else starting it.

I was lucky to have not sent any 'sensitive' pm to any 'member' of BFL team or person related with them.

It's obvious that when there is some legal trouble or a law firm investigating a case, they ask for all other information. Like I can read the OP, it says that most employees of the company were members of this forum. Theymos may be asked to provide everything related to those employees and if he wouldn't do it, it could have appeared as if he is supporting them. That usually is assumed. Glad that he supported them.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: Bicknellski on April 19, 2015, 01:10:25 AM

Quote from: unamis76 on April 18, 2015, 03:33:29 PM

I'm surprised that BFL is such a small part of the forum. I was about to suggest you should just give them yesterday's forum snapshot Grin

Jokes aside... What the hell do we have to do with BFL? Why the hell should theymos be forced to lose time gathering all the information these guys need? If they need info, get them yourselves... Don't force your own citizens to work for you for free, gathering old information they have nothing to do about and sending them in if they don't bow to this... Pretty annoying.

As for the PM protection... I agree with Blazr. Losing your password would be a feature. But this also should be opt-in, with a big, annoying, one time warning.

Ignoring scams leads to this. Being proactive could resolve it simply banning BFL in 2012 or 2013 as things escalated. If you don't want to bother doing hours of info collation then eliminate the scammers sooner and permanently. No remorse here this subpoena has happened. It will happen again without any proactive measures by admins.

Scams are not banned. Unless some other rule was broken during that timeframe (I have no idea if one was, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that one was not) then a ban would not have been appropriate.

Bicknellski

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1000

Quote from: unamis76 on April 18, 2015, 03:33:29 PM

I'm surprised that BFL is such a small part of the forum. I was about to suggest you should just give them yesterday's forum snapshot Grin

Jokes aside... What the hell do we have to do with BFL? Why the hell should theymos be forced to lose time gathering all the information these guys need? If they need info, get them yourselves... Don't force your own citizens to work for you for free, gathering old information they have nothing to do about and sending them in if they don't bow to this... Pretty annoying.

As for the PM protection... I agree with Blazr. Losing your password would be a feature. But this also should be opt-in, with a big, annoying, one time warning.

Ignoring scams leads to this. Being proactive could resolve it simply banning BFL in 2012 or 2013 as things escalated. If you don't want to bother doing hours of info collation then eliminate the scammers sooner and permanently. No remorse here this subpoena has happened. It will happen again without any proactive measures by admins.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: VenusFlyTrap on April 18, 2015, 08:12:39 PM

Quote from: dogie on April 18, 2015, 07:38:06 PM

Quote from: VenusFlyTrap on April 18, 2015, 07:12:01 PM

Quote from: erikalui on April 18, 2015, 01:31:12 PM

I just found this: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=176216470&z=77fe495b

And this http://ia801803.us.archive.org/33/items/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083.68.1.pdf

We have been following this for months. Where have you been dude? Look at the other BFL threads.

Its hard to when only 1/60 posts is actually about the case, which is CK's point. While there may be some useful content in that old thread, there's so much noise that its untenable to actually find that information in the thread.

Dogie of course you have to say that. Is not as though you contributed anything to the thread. Complaining is easier.

Why do I have to say that? Of course I didn't contribute to that thread, it was unusable and a mess. Not a lot of point investing time into thoughtful discussion there when its going to get buried by PG/GG within 20 seconds.

VenusFlyTrap

full member

Activity: 226

Merit: 100

Are you OCD?

Quote from: dogie on April 18, 2015, 07:38:06 PM

Quote from: VenusFlyTrap on April 18, 2015, 07:12:01 PM

Quote from: erikalui on April 18, 2015, 01:31:12 PM

I just found this: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=176216470&z=77fe495b

And this http://ia801803.us.archive.org/33/items/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083.68.1.pdf

We have been following this for months. Where have you been dude? Look at the other BFL threads.

Its hard to when only 1/60 posts is actually about the case, which is CK's point. While there may be some useful content in that old thread, there's so much noise that its untenable to actually find that information in the thread.

Dogie of course you have to say that. Is not as though you contributed anything to the thread. Complaining is easier.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: VenusFlyTrap on April 18, 2015, 07:12:01 PM

Quote from: erikalui on April 18, 2015, 01:31:12 PM

I just found this: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=176216470&z=77fe495b

And this http://ia801803.us.archive.org/33/items/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083.68.1.pdf

We have been following this for months. Where have you been dude? Look at the other BFL threads.

Its hard to when only 1/60 posts is actually about the case, which is CK's point. While there may be some useful content in that old thread, there's so much noise that its untenable to actually find that information in the thread.

VenusFlyTrap

full member

Activity: 226

Merit: 100

Are you OCD?

Quote from: erikalui on April 18, 2015, 01:31:12 PM

I just found this: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=176216470&z=77fe495b

And this http://ia801803.us.archive.org/33/items/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083.68.1.pdf

We have been following this for months. Where have you been dude? Look at the other BFL threads.

Topic: BFL subpoena - page 2. (Read 8720 times)