They convicted him on “supporting the transfer of underage pornography”, i.e. he ran an exit node that “allowed” the upload of CP to an Austrian image hoster. Apparently, he wasn’t protected because he ran the exit as an individual, not a registered company. Most likely, the Austrian authority checked who uploaded the images, and found his IP address, which became the basis for convicting him. He didn’t have any of the materials because all those stuffs were encrypted in transit.
He mentioned that law that was used to prosecute him was changed a few weeks later to protect individuals as well. He apparently now ran Tor exits under an offshore company.
In summary, from what he said, he just happened to run an unrestricted exit node that some people used to upload CP.
I mean… that is the big issue with things like tor and the decentralized youtube alternative everyone wants.
This is an issue on Lemmy as well, one that very few so far seem to have wisened up to. If you host a server and federate it, your server will pull, store and display the content your users are watching for all to see. So you could be on the hook for distributing illegal material if you don’t preemptively defederate from instances potentially hosting content that is illegal for you to possess.
I mean you could say the same thing about any entity hosting public wifi, but I doubt the local cafe owner has to worry when someone breaks the law on their guest network.
This feels really inconsistent is the main problem.
Stupidity or ignorance of the law does not make you innocent. Great though the guy was for running a tor node, he did not realize what liability he set himself up for. Unfortunate and I feel for the guy, but he was technically guilty and that’s all that matters in the court of law.
But I personally can’t support anything where “Oh well, I guess I accidentally supported the proliferation of CSAM”.
Does this mean you’re opposed to, say, roads, because they can be used to transport child porn? How about postal services—they’ll even pick it up and deliver it wherever you want!
There are 7,000+ Tor relays, and 2,000+ bridges being run by entities including individuals, orgs, corporations, and most likely governments. (https://metrics.torproject.org/networksize.html) So, the answer is yes, no, and something in between. He himself didn’t say, but the article portrayed him as being an individual who believed in free speech, an activity which Tor does help support.
They convicted him on “supporting the transfer of underage pornography”, i.e. he ran an exit node that “allowed” the upload of CP to an Austrian image hoster. Apparently, he wasn’t protected because he ran the exit as an individual, not a registered company. Most likely, the Austrian authority checked who uploaded the images, and found his IP address, which became the basis for convicting him. He didn’t have any of the materials because all those stuffs were encrypted in transit.
He mentioned that law that was used to prosecute him was changed a few weeks later to protect individuals as well. He apparently now ran Tor exits under an offshore company.
In summary, from what he said, he just happened to run an unrestricted exit node that some people used to upload CP.
Removed by mod
This is an issue on Lemmy as well, one that very few so far seem to have wisened up to. If you host a server and federate it, your server will pull, store and display the content your users are watching for all to see. So you could be on the hook for distributing illegal material if you don’t preemptively defederate from instances potentially hosting content that is illegal for you to possess.
Removed by mod
This is it: https://lemmynsfw.com/post/418317
This is it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1204784
I mean you could say the same thing about any entity hosting public wifi, but I doubt the local cafe owner has to worry when someone breaks the law on their guest network.
This feels really inconsistent is the main problem.
Removed by mod
dude is innocent man.
Stupidity or ignorance of the law does not make you innocent. Great though the guy was for running a tor node, he did not realize what liability he set himself up for. Unfortunate and I feel for the guy, but he was technically guilty and that’s all that matters in the court of law.
I mean he’s not. He did literally allow CP to be uploaded. And he literally wasn’t legally protected.
Kind of crazy how unsympathetic people are being towards Tor and Tor operators here
But it’s kind of like arresting the gas station owner for allowing a drug deal in his parking lot.
Does this mean you’re opposed to, say, roads, because they can be used to transport child porn? How about postal services—they’ll even pick it up and deliver it wherever you want!
Does he/people get paid for running the exit node?
There are 7,000+ Tor relays, and 2,000+ bridges being run by entities including individuals, orgs, corporations, and most likely governments. (https://metrics.torproject.org/networksize.html) So, the answer is yes, no, and something in between. He himself didn’t say, but the article portrayed him as being an individual who believed in free speech, an activity which Tor does help support.