Gilles Tran wrote:
> 
> I understand that he was providing a list of blocked sites (including 
> allegedly criminal sites). 

Yes. It didn't matter earlier, while he just had URL's listed (so you
could copy-paste them). When he added links to them, this happened. Note
that the law in touch says nothing for either one. That law *demands*
the site to contain childporn to get blocked.

> If that's true, he was actually 1) providing his 
> visitors with means to obtain such material and 2) actively helping said 
> sites to find customers. 

Yes, but this also was the situation earlier.

> Isn't that enough to make the site illegal, or at 
> least blockable pending an investigation? If the accusation is true, this 
> has little to do with censorship and all with common sense.

No. It might make the site illegal (via other laws), but then the proper
way to handle the situation would be contacting the author and he's ISP,
as has been done earlier. Why the police didn't use the proper way I
don't know, but they should have.

Police also don't have permission to shoot bank robbers right away, even
if they are armed.

> For instance, would a site called "stolengoods.com" consisting in only links 
> to sellers of stolen merchandise be legal? 

Probably not, but it wouldn't make it a *foreing site containing
childporn*, as police was eMensioning that the blocked site did.

> Or a site called 
> "hire-a-hitman.com" consisting in a directory of professional contract 
> killers? 

Again, there are proper ways to handle the situation. Lawful ways, which
should be used. The very guardians of the law should follow the law
themselves - at least to get some respect from the "normal people". If
they don't, they're showing a very bad example.

> IANAL, but countries have laws against aiding or abetting criminals 
> and criminal activity, and the way assistance is given may be irrelevant. I 
> don't know the details of the case, so I'm just asking.

Yep, we do also. As I wrote, "basically it seems that both parties (the
author and police) have broken the law (different parts of it, though)"

> G. 

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message