A Guilty Verdict In Silk Road Case Could Doom Internet Freedoms

[keithers]

Internet freedoms are disappearing day by day regardless of the case and its outcome

[smoothie]

Omg the internetz will be doooomed! Lol

He was trafficking illegal drugs. I don't get how "one man breaking the law" = Internet doomed

Lol

[smoothie]

Internet freedoms are disappearing day by day regardless of the case and its outcome

Bitcoin gives new freedom to where freedom is being attempted to be taken away.

Bitcoin is essentially the free-market's middle finger to the current monetary system.

[pirsquared]

I don't think it would doom the internet, but rather give mods an incentive to not allow illegal things to happen on their websites

It would give any sensible person reason enough to not participate in the moderation of any forum or website that may come under scrutiny by any relevant authority. Fear is not in and of itself incentive to do or not do anything. Reward is much more of an incentive.

I don't want to be the mod of any forum on bitcointalk.com (not that anyone has asked) for fear of being charged with facilitating money laundering. Reasonable compensation may incentivize me to perform the duty as expected.

Say public loitering and skateboarding is illegal in a particular jurisdiction. Should the shop owner forsake providing parking space for "legal" patrons for fear of being charged with aiding and abetting the wrongdoers?

I haven't looking into the DPR/Silk Road case in any great length. I do not think the owners of craigslist.org, bitcointalk.org, ebay.com, amazon.com, reddit.com, facebook.com, Silk Road.onion, etc. should be held responsible for users' actions. It just doesn't make any sense. People commit crimes. Websites are just there for people to use and abuse.

We have enough moderation and censorship of the internet in the "free" world. Laws, as they are written, have long arms and great scope. We should be actively looking to reduce this reach rather than increase it. The children are fine. The terrorists don't really hate most of us. And, the elderly are oblivious. Let's just be allowed to live and let live.

[TheButterZone]

I don't think it would doom the internet, but rather give mods an incentive to not allow illegal things to happen on their websites

It would give any sensible person reason enough to not participate in the moderation of any forum or website that may come under scrutiny by any relevant authority.

Fixed that redundancy for you, and I concur.

[Swordsoffreedom]

Concerns about lawmakers setting regulations for the darkweb does concern me.
Not so much sympathy for ross but I am afraid of the implications this case could have on the legal system.

According to the website, the campaign is run by “a coalition of individuals, organizations and businesses that believe the outcome of Ross Ulbricht’s case is tremendously important for the future of Internet freedom, user privacy and cryptocurrency regulation.”

The website goes on to say that because Ulbricht “has been unfairly portrayed as a man who planned murder,” the public hasn’t united in support for Ulbricht, which is why a crowdfunding campaign is necessary for a legal defense fund.

Groups like the Free Ross Ulbricht legal defense fund, which was started by his mother, Lyn Ulbricht, argue that this case needs so much attention and financial support from the public because it “will set precedent for the 21st century and pave the way for new law and interpretations that could impact the future and freedom of the Internet.”

___

“This case will pave the way for new laws and new interpretations of law,” said Lyn Ulbricht, adding that her son’s attorney, Dratel, has also argued that the U.S. government will likely point to this case, as they have with other high-profile cases, as a reason why Congress needs to pass “draconian legislation.”

“Laws will be made based on the Silk Road case” that will likely impede Internet autonomy and privacy, Lyn Ulbricht said, adding that the addition of virtual currencies like bitcoin to the list of currencies that must follow rules and regulations designed for legal currencies defeats the entire purpose of bitcoin operating as an anonymous cryptocurrency.

So there is something at stake here for Bitcoiners as Jeff said in those comments Collective punishment is never the correct answer.

[wenben]

Legalize marijuana and cocaine and none of this will happen.

[russokai]

If you break the law you will probably be charged and tried. That has very little to do with internet freedom.

Yep and if you live in NY, you should already be arrested by now.   

Seems like that does have something to do with freedom....when you are rotting in a jail sell for selling .05 BTC to someone and you failed to get their SSN and verify their address.

[BADecker]

If you break the law you will probably be charged and tried. That has very little to do with internet freedom.

It has everything to do with Internet freedom. Internet freedom is PEOPLE freedom. And the question isn't about breaking the law. The question is a code violation, although they make it look like it is breaking a law. So, it is a small group of people - government - against the rest of the people. Which freedom will win? The freedom of the governmental people to enslave us, or our freedom to resist the government people?

Most of the time when you are charged by some governmental agency, it is for a code violation. Somebody in government made a code that you didn't agree to and maybe don't know about. What does that have to do with you except when you agree to it?

Common law has to do with harm and damage, and what the jurors in the area might think that the law is when they bring in a verdict.

Most jurors don't realize that they have the total right to judge the law as invalid, just like they judge the defendant innocent or guilty. Despite what the judge says to them, if they decide that a code violation, or even a law, is inappropriate, they can strike down the law or code by their verdict. They have the right and duty to judge the law, but mostly they don't know it.

[AliceWonder]

I do not think the owners of craigslist.org, bitcointalk.org, ebay.com, amazon.com, reddit.com, facebook.com, Silk Road.onion, etc. should be held responsible for users' actions. It just doesn't make any sense. People commit crimes. Websites are just there for people to use and abuse.

The difference is DPR conspired with the people making crimes and even had his staff knowingly participate in the deals by settling seller/buyer disputes.
The product DPR sold was a place where these illegal activities could take place designed as a place these illegal activities could take place.
And he actively sought both sellers and buyers.

That is called conspiracy to commit a crime and is vastly different than, say, me offering blowjobs on craigslist (I don't, btw) - craigslist wouldn't be conspiring with me to break prostitution laws, and I would be in violation of their policy.

DPR not only allowed the illegal activity, he sought it and intentionally helped them hide their illegal activity from law enforcement.

putting silkroad in that list is like putting a watermelon in a box of strawberries. It doesn't fit.

[bryant.coleman]

Legalize marijuana and cocaine and none of this will happen.

Marijuana is being legalized all around the world. But I don't think that the same will happen with Cocaine. Portugal is an exception, but none of the other countries are going to follow their example. The Cocaine business is worth more than $100 billion USD every year, and many of the most powerful cartels and organizations survive on it.

[wolfYella]

I do not think the owners of craigslist.org, [Suspicious link removed], amazon.com, reddit.com, facebook.com, Silk Road.onion, etc. should be held responsible for users' actions. It just doesn't make any sense. People commit crimes. Websites are just there for people to use and abuse.

The difference is DPR conspired with the people making crimes and even had his staff knowingly participate in the deals by settling seller/buyer disputes.
The product DPR sold was a place where these illegal activities could take place designed as a place these illegal activities could take place.
And he actively sought both sellers and buyers.

That is called conspiracy to commit a crime and is vastly different than, say, me offering blowjobs on craigslist (I don't, btw) - craigslist wouldn't be conspiring with me to break prostitution laws, and I would be in violation of their policy.

DPR not only allowed the illegal activity, he sought it and intentionally helped them hide their illegal activity from law enforcement.

putting silkroad in that list is like putting a watermelon in a box of strawberries. It doesn't fit.

This is true. All of the above sites have policies that attempt to limit illegal activity on their sites, although they cannot police their site 100%.

SR on the other hand encouraged illegal activity to take place and advertised itself as a place for illegal activity.

[wenben]

Legalize marijuana and cocaine and none of this will happen.

Marijuana is being legalized all around the world. But I don't think that the same will happen with Cocaine. Portugal is an exception, but none of the other countries are going to follow their example. The Cocaine business is worth more than $100 billion USD every year, and many of the most powerful cartels and organizations survive on it.

Then more reason to legalize cocaine than marijuana.

[cutepuppy]

Legalize marijuana and cocaine and none of this will happen.

Marijuana is being legalized all around the world. But I don't think that the same will happen with Cocaine. Portugal is an exception, but none of the other countries are going to follow their example. The Cocaine business is worth more than $100 billion USD every year, and many of the most powerful cartels and organizations survive on it.

Then more reason to legalize cocaine than marijuana.

I disagree about this. Cocaine is a very hard drug that can really mess a person up and is very easy to get addicted to.

Weed on the other hand is much less addictive and generally will not kill you.

[Cicero2.0]

Agreed. The laws he is alleged to have violated are what they are. I disagree with prohibition but that doe snot make me immune to prosecution under those laws.

It does if your written notice prior to trial, converts the complaints into claims against the individuals, personally, who are claiming you did something wrong.

Your claim in your notice converts the court into a common law court, your court, under your rules, if you STAND AS A MAN (or WOMAN). Then it is man against man, human being against human being. Your notice must require that they show you the damages done to any human from your involvement. And, they are required to have first hand knowledge of it. This is basic. If they can't show harm or damages (REAL HARM OR DAMAGE TO SOME HUMAN BEING THAT CAN BE DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTED TO YOU - CORPUS DELICTI) by their verbal testimony under oath, THEY are the ones who will have to pay via their bond or insurance (PROVIDED THAT YOU HAVE STATED SUCH IN YOUR ORIGINAL NOTICE TO THE COURT). At this point they will not be able to become bonded again, and may lose their government job.

This is standard common law operation. And it is what the whole United States is based on. But you need to claim it, and use it, and NOT deviate from it. NOT your attorneys. You need to stand up as a man in court! But if they don't let you, their judgments are void judgments that you can attack and destroy any time thereafter. Standard law.

Walk into any federal court and claim that. After they finish laughing at you they might hold you in contempt, but trust me they will get their conviction if the evidence supports their assertions.

[Cicero2.0]

If you break the law you will probably be charged and tried. That has very little to do with internet freedom.

It has everything to do with Internet freedom. Internet freedom is PEOPLE freedom. And the question isn't about breaking the law. The question is a code violation, although they make it look like it is breaking a law. So, it is a small group of people - government - against the rest of the people. Which freedom will win? The freedom of the governmental people to enslave us, or our freedom to resist the government people?

Most of the time when you are charged by some governmental agency, it is for a code violation. Somebody in government made a code that you didn't agree to and maybe don't know about. What does that have to do with you except when you agree to it?

Common law has to do with harm and damage, and what the jurors in the area might think that the law is when they bring in a verdict.

Most jurors don't realize that they have the total right to judge the law as invalid, just like they judge the defendant innocent or guilty. Despite what the judge says to them, if they decide that a code violation, or even a law, is inappropriate, they can strike down the law or code by their verdict. They have the right and duty to judge the law, but mostly they don't know it.

I agree with your common law idea in spirit, but this guy allegedley knowingly assisted in criminial conspiraces and violated the law of the land. If he is guilty he will do serious time. Principals do not excuse us from following laws or even codes. I agree that reforms are needed but this guy isn't just some dumb kid that got caught up with the wrong people and didn't know that what he was doing was wrong.

[Harley997]

If you break the law you will probably be charged and tried. That has very little to do with internet freedom.

It has everything to do with Internet freedom. Internet freedom is PEOPLE freedom. And the question isn't about breaking the law. The question is a code violation, although they make it look like it is breaking a law. So, it is a small group of people - government - against the rest of the people. Which freedom will win? The freedom of the governmental people to enslave us, or our freedom to resist the government people?

Most of the time when you are charged by some governmental agency, it is for a code violation. Somebody in government made a code that you didn't agree to and maybe don't know about. What does that have to do with you except when you agree to it?

Common law has to do with harm and damage, and what the jurors in the area might think that the law is when they bring in a verdict.

Most jurors don't realize that they have the total right to judge the law as invalid, just like they judge the defendant innocent or guilty. Despite what the judge says to them, if they decide that a code violation, or even a law, is inappropriate, they can strike down the law or code by their verdict. They have the right and duty to judge the law, but mostly they don't know it.

I agree with your common law idea in spirit, but this guy allegedley knowingly assisted in criminial conspiraces and violated the law of the land. If he is guilty he will do serious time. Principals do not excuse us from following laws or even codes. I agree that reforms are needed but this guy isn't just some dumb kid that got caught up with the wrong people and didn't know that what he was doing was wrong.

It is extremely rare that a jury will strike down a law like this. Both the prosecutor and the defense will attempt to exclude people from the jury pool who are not willing to carry out the law as it is written.

[tntdgcr]

A Guilty Verdict In Silk Road Case Could Doom Internet Freedoms

http://www.mintpressnews.com/a-guilty-verdict-in-silk-road-case-could-doom-internet-freedoms/193886/

no , it has nothing to do with internet freedoms. as an American, he has to follow the laws. he facilitated illegal activity whether people want to see that or not.

I'm quite sure there are many dealers working P2P then ever, exercising their "freedoms". the risk of course, is losing your other more tangible freedoms in the process.

DPR knew the risks, he didn't protect himself properly, then went on to try and commit further crimes to button up. He was willing to take lives for his profit, not for internet freedoms.

[LostDutchman]

I'll have my book out soon which will cover the various aspects of internet privacy and money laundering.

[brian_23452]

A Guilty Verdict In Silk Road Case Could Doom Internet Freedoms

http://www.mintpressnews.com/a-guilty-verdict-in-silk-road-case-could-doom-internet-freedoms/193886/

"Groups like the Free Ross Ulbricht legal defense fund, which was started by his mother, Lyn Ulbricht, argue that this case needs so much attention and financial support from the public because it 'will set precedent for the 21st century and pave the way for new law and interpretations that could impact the future and freedom of the Internet.'"

Oh, well his mother said it so it must be true.