undefined | Better HN

0 pointsNooneAtAll31mo ago0 comments

that's kinda the normalization argument, not the reason behind it

"it is done because it's always done so"

0 comments

Well, yes, it is actually pretty normal for suspected criminal businesses. What's unusual is that this one has their own publicity engine. Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes.

More normally it looks like e.g. this in the UK: https://news.sky.com/video/police-raid-hundreds-of-businesse...

CyberGEND more often seem to do smalltime copyright infringement enforcement, but there are a number of authorities with the right to conduct raids.

learingsci1mo ago

“Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes.”

I’m sorry but that’s absurd even amidst the cacophony of absurdity that comprises public discourse these days.

Rygian1mo ago

I'll bite.

How was TikTok held liable for the crimes it was accused of?

4 more replies

malfist1mo ago

Corporations routinely get a slap on the wrist (seconds of profitability), not required to admit guilt, or deferred prosecution agreements.

monsieurbanana1mo ago

I'm not sure what you're getting at, physical investigation is the common procedure. You need a reason _not_ to do it, and since "it's all digital" is not a good reason we go back to doing the usual thing.

mothballed1mo ago

It's a show of force. "Look we have big strong men with le guns and the neat jack boots, we can send 12 of them in for every one of you." Whether it is actually needed for evidence is immaterial to that.

Teever1mo ago

If law enforcement credibily believes that criminals are conspiring to commit a crime and are actively doing so in a particular location what is wrong with sending armed people to stop those criminal acivities as well as apprehend the criminals and what ever evidence of their crimes may exist?

If this isn't the entire purpose of law enforcement then what is exactly?

1 more reply

swiftcoder1mo ago

It can be both things at once. It obviously sends a message, but hey, maybe you get lucky, and someone left a memo in the bin by the printer that blows the case wide open.

1 more reply

DetroitThrow1mo ago

Isn't it both necessary and normal if they need more information about why they were generating CSAM? I don't know why the rule of law shouldn't apply to child pornography or why it would be incorrect to normalize the prosecution of CSAM creators.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

pjc501mo ago

More normally it looks like e.g. this in the UK: https://news.sky.com/video/police-raid-hundreds-of-businesse...

CyberGEND more often seem to do smalltime copyright infringement enforcement, but there are a number of authorities with the right to conduct raids.

learingsci1mo ago

“Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes.”

I’m sorry but that’s absurd even amidst the cacophony of absurdity that comprises public discourse these days.

Rygian1mo ago

I'll bite.

How was TikTok held liable for the crimes it was accused of?

4 more replies

malfist1mo ago

Corporations routinely get a slap on the wrist (seconds of profitability), not required to admit guilt, or deferred prosecution agreements.

monsieurbanana1mo ago

mothballed1mo ago

Teever1mo ago

If this isn't the entire purpose of law enforcement then what is exactly?

1 more reply

swiftcoder1mo ago

It can be both things at once. It obviously sends a message, but hey, maybe you get lucky, and someone left a memo in the bin by the printer that blows the case wide open.

1 more reply

DetroitThrow1mo ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse