Legal ramifications for PtD (Pay the Developer) feature in the SAFE protocol

[neo]

@TungSvard

Participants of the network as the collective whole is who paid. They have a pre-agreement (a contract) which is the SAFE protocol which says any app can be paid by the system as dictated by the algorithm.

Lets step back a minute, this needs some precedent to show that this would even happen.

Those who pay big dollars for software, enabling companies to write it, are not considered liable for the criminals who use the software. Those other customers gave money to teh company producing the software. And like SAFE the crims use the software be it protocol or database to further their fraud or whatever crime.

So I am at a loss to see ANY precedent for your claims which go against common sense and any legal precedent I’ve seen in some 40-50 years of software, protocol, OS being used by criminals to further their crimes.

And you have yet to demonstrate how people who paid to upload data are in any contract.

And you have yet to show how they are connected to coin paid out by the network, since the coin can be proven beyond any doubt to have been physically destroyed once paid.

You are making leaps and bounds of linkages that each have yet to be shown to have any legal precedent. From the very first to the last.

And if you believe this then the farmers are libel so much more because without them there is nothing for the crims to use & the farmers get paid for doing it.

Seriously show some proof of precedent or accept that you maybe wrong in this case.

Until you start to show some evidence of your extraordinary claims of doomsday events for the SAFE network, there is only one conclusion to make.

[fergish]

@TungSvard

A prosecutor can argue that those who participate on the SAFE network are knowingly paying for such illegal activity because they have all agreed to the SAFE protocol to pay app devs regardless of what it does but based on the Put/Get algorithm.

It would be far truer to say that anyone who holds or uses the US dollar is responsible for funding crime, terrorism, child porn, et al, not to mention war, political assassination, “collateral damage”, etc. That doesn’t mean that bullies won’t try to make the case against safecoin, just like they’ve tried and failed to make it against bitcoin, while all the while supporting the financial system which is truly predatory. They will try, certainly. May even succeed in some kangaroo convictions, like Ross Ulbricht. But on the whole, they’ve already lost.

[janitor]

I said that in older topics.
HB said its FUD, like here.
We’ll see.

What you don’t say and I think it should be said (I already said this several times, most recently in the nonsense topic by goindeep) is that what’s illegal isn’t universal. Terrorist content is going to be a sensitive topic because it’s illegal in most jurisdictions.

Fergish, the issue isn’t so much related to holding the tokens but chunks of “illegal” content. A solution that would work for me would be to abolish laws that make that illegal, and the problem would be gone. But that won’t happen, if anything it will get worse.
Telcos aren’t liable for for transmission, but must keep the logs. Safe farmers will store and serve “illegal” data, so that’s different. If 15% of data be illegal, then anyone with 1TB is 99% (or whatever) likely to be storing and serving at least some illegal content.

[nice]

Do we put phone, book publishing or television companies shareholders in jail ?

[janitor]

If they publish illegal content, they get into problems.
Usually shareholders don’t get individually punished because of the way laws work, but SAFE isn’t a company, so farmers ain’t shareholders.

[happybeing]

@luckybit:

Political and legal risks exist.

I’m not denying that, of course there are risks. I’m saying the OP has no sensible basis, is weak baseless speculation to create fear and doubt. Anything is possible, the government could send swat teams around to our houses, or hack our cars to run off the road.

In some places government may well do that, but not because of some fine point of law. It will happen because there is a regime that operates above the law, through brute force, fear and propaganda. Users of SAFEnetwork in those places will be very familiar with those risks, and take them or not on their own terms.

One of the reasons for building SAFEnetwork is to help people who live in fear of their government to do legitimate things that their governments would readily punish them for, at less risk of being caught, not more.

[000]

Who sues The Internet ? Who sues each and every ISP for allowing Porn- , Drugs- , Arms- Violence- AnyAbusive-Content being pushed or allowed onto the public ? Stop blaming SAFE for being also just a better tool for the better and best sides of Information exchange , specially , for all private Individuals , and other valuable groups , communities . Like in everything , we the users will find ways to point out and curate meaningful content .

We could give a thorough thought to implement some ranking possibilities for the SAFE
network , like Scrap-Crap-Spam ( SCS ) , Disgusting & Unacceptable Content ( D&UC ) ;
and on the mayor counterpart , a star system for the rating of poor to rich content pages ( 0-9 Stars )

[TungSvard]

@Blindsite2k

This just makes me laugh because if we really took the law that seriously then every citizen of the U.S. and Canada would be held accountable for war crimes due to the actions taken by people like George W. Bush and other such politicians who violate human rights and the Geneva conventions.

Bush used his legal authority as president even though there is debate he broke other laws like declaring war without Congressional approval. War always violates human rights when humans are killed. But the declaration of war supercedes human rights from the perspective of the country declaring war. Poor analogy.

@Blindsite2k

You aren’t supporting a specific endevour you’re supporting “content creation” of all shapes and sizes.

So why not give users of SAFE the freedom of choice to support, pay, donate their own safecoin? It’s the way of the free market. That’s what a prosecutor would argue. So supporting content creation of all shapes and sizes indiscriminately is laughable. To them and from their perspective, they would argue that this is a front and cover to disguise the fact that SAFE is a terrorist and a pedophile anonymous payment network.

@Blindsite2k

Second how is “the government” to file suit against anyone? They don’t know the account names.

They don’t need account names. They just need probable cause to seize computers. They will seek out those who will likely likely own safecoin – everyone on this forum via emails and IP addresses, the SAFE team, everyone who has bought and sold safecoin on the exchanges via KYC and AML information. They don’t need to catch everyone, even the real criminals, to bring down the network. Just make an example of a few. The fear of arrest is enough for folks to run away.

@Blindsite2k

Third it’s not the people that fund the creators it’s the network. As has been discussed. Not a cent comes from the user’s wallets.

Funds are never originated by a machine nor by software. Funds always originate from a human or a collective group of humans. If one can create a machine to pay, everyone would be rich – makes no sense from a legal standpoint. Yes, it’s the people who fund the network when they use safecoin to buy storage. It’s funded by farmers who provide storage for the network who get safecoin in return. It’s these folks who support the terrorist and child porn activities. The issue is indiscriminate payment; payment for both illegal and legal activity. Without payment, there is no issue. That’s why it should left to the choices of the people.

@Blindsite2k

Because then what’s the point of PtP? We’re back to politics again. Might as well just vote with your dollar.

Exactly.

[TungSvard]

@neo

Those who pay big dollars for software, enabling companies to write it, are not considered liable for the criminals who use the software. Those other customers gave money to teh company producing the software. And like SAFE the crims use the software be it protocol or database to further their fraud or whatever crime.

Correct. I am in agreement. All legal. What is illegal is to code in rules in the software that use those collected funds to pay the users using the software which makes no sense from the software company when the customer already bought the software to begin with. But if that ever were to happen, the software company would be held liable IF THE CODE WAS HIDDEN. But if the code was publicly known that the software pays for it’s usage, those who purchased it could be prosecuted.

@neo

And you have yet to demonstrate how people who paid to upload data are in any contract.

Paying for upload services are in contract because they expect storage for payment in safecoin. The system supported by participants in the network which is governed by the SAFE protocol ensures this will occur.

@neo

And you have yet to show how they are connected to coin paid out by the network, since the coin can be proven beyond any doubt to have been physically destroyed once paid.

Destroyed AFTER payment. Payment was still made and made usable.

@neo

And if you believe this then the farmers are libel so much more because without them there is nothing for the crims to use & the farmers get paid for doing it.

The farmers and everyone else will not be liable if PtD were removed. There was plenty of discussion about this on the child porn thread and the fear of storing such material on one’s hard drive.

[TungSvard]

@fergish

t would be far truer to say that anyone who holds or uses the US dollar is responsible for funding crime, terrorism, child porn, et al, not to mention war, political assassination, “collateral damage”, etc.

There’s no fixed written protocol, contract, or law that says US dollars will be used to pay for all activities including the illegal ones. I am free to choose who to pay with USD. If I don’t like a service or product or content, I can refuse to and choose not to pay for what I do not want. That’s the difference. PtD does not give choice. It’s a forced subsidy, a forced donation. Voters vote for leaders who entrust them to use tax dollars. No such thing with PtD.

[TungSvard]

@happybeing

One of the reasons for building SAFEnetwork is to help people who live in fear of their government to do legitimate things that their governments would readily punish them for, at less risk of being caught, not more.

Show, demonstrate, provide logic reasoning (as you always request) that any of these fantastic things can never be accomplished without PtD.

[TungSvard]

@000

Who sues The Internet ? Who sues each and every ISP for allowing Porn- , Drugs- , Arms- Violence- AnyAbusive-Content being pushed or allowed onto the public ?

No one sues ISP because they do not indiscriminately pay for content.

@000

We could give a thorough thought to implement some ranking possibilities for the SAFE network , like Scrap-Crap-Spam ( SCS ) , Disgusting & Unacceptable Content ( D&UC ) ; and on the mayor counterpart , a star system for the rating of poor to rich content pages ( 0-9 Stars )

Already accomplished by what is in place today, in the free markets; in places where people get to choose who and what to support with their money. Can it be improved? Absolutely, can be done on top of the SAFE network and thus, in a better way than today. But not when PtD as forced payment is embedded in the protocol.

[Blindsite2k]

@TungSvard

They don’t need account names. They just need probable cause to seize computers. They will seek out those who will likely likely own safecoin – everyone on this forum via emails and IP addresses, the SAFE team, everyone who has bought and sold safecoin on the exchanges via KYC and AML information. They don’t need to catch everyone, even the real criminals, to bring down the network. Just make an example of a few. The fear of arrest is enough for folks to run away.

So because one owns safecoin one is responsible for funding the network and because the network funds all content creation one is therefore indirectly responsible for funding some undesirable behavior? Gee that’s like saying because one owns a gun one is indirectly responsible for a war in some foreign country because the gun manufacturer also supplies arms to the those fighting the war. Same could be said for having a bank account.

But let’s say we flew with this for half a second. In the beginning maybe he gov’t could instill fear enough to discourage people from using the network. Maybe. Maybe when the network was young and not many people were using it yet. But it would still be a massive mess. FBI break into people’s homes and seize their personal computers and accuse them of crimes that they can’t tie them to save for the fact they may or may not own a particular cryptocurrency? That’s a stretch at best.

But if the network spreads fast as it’s predicted and if everyone starts using it? Little old ladies and a kids and teenagers all bankers and scientists and all manner of people all around the world everywhere? It won’t matter what the NSA does. They can’t arrest the entire country. If 10% adoopt safe opinion will shift, it’ll become the new norm. And if the gov’t tries draconion tactics after that then they’ll get hammered by the people.

[TungSvard]

@Blindsite2k

Gee that’s like saying because one owns a gun one is indirectly responsible for a war in some foreign country because the gun manufacturer also supplies arms to the those fighting the war.

If one purchases the gun with an agreement (a contract) with the gun manufacturer that the funds can be used indiscriminately including for war, then the gun owner is in cahoots with the gun manufacturer. Without the physical agreement, the gun owner has only agreed to give money for the product as governed by the laws of commerce, nothing else.

If the government determined that the SAFE network was illegal and a tool for anarchists that support vile illegal activities such as terrorism and child porn, I just don’t see little old ladies; kids; teenagers; parents clamoring for using SAFE. Makes more sense that those people will run away and report others who own safecoin.

The likely scenario is someone will fork SAFE without PtD and then everyone would start using that version instead. Much easier than risking arrest.

[Blindsite2k]

@TungSvard

If the government determined that the SAFE network was illegal and a tool for anarchists that support vile illegal activities such as terrorism and child porn, I just don’t see little old ladies; kids; teenagers; parents clamoring for using SAFE. Makes more sense that those people will run away and report others who own safecoin.

Downloading music and movies can land you in federal prison. Yet that kind of hasn’t stopped the success of bittorent and the rage of people pirating media. Strange isn’t it?

[neverending_manga]

While I stay an anti-fan of pay the developer, the OP isn’t a valid argument in my view. I don’t see how this would be unlike tor exit nodes with respect to kiddie porn sites, as the free/paid nature of kiddie porn doesn’t change the legality of the stuff, at least in kind.

IIRC, besides some unpleasant visits from everybody’s favorite blue suit gang, tor exit hosts has only gotten a single person or two probation, and that one person outright stated that tor was the best way to transfer kiddie porn. Now the government is still being a complete little tyrannical shit in this regard, but it seems to me that the odd safenet miner/invester/developer should be fine, factoring in only logic and evidence.

Of course, it should be pointed out that if government decides that it has a bone to pick with maidsafe, than all bets are off, as the thugs in blue will go after random safenet users/developers and just invent shit as they go along.

[TungSvard]

Using bitTorrent also has the fair-use laws going which says copies can be made for personal use within limits. But putting that aside, bitTorrent does not have functionality or the means to pay for using its software. The issue is payment and knowingly and willingly to pay via the SAFE protocol as contract.

[neverending_manga]

Isn’t Maidsafe officially a non-profit? Eitherway, couldn’t the individual farmers invest in safe through an investment firm/company to shield themselves legally?

[TungSvard]

Running a Tor exit node does not pay for the illegal activity of child porn. The issue is payment via PtD which under contract via the SAFE protocol knowingly and willingly pays for app usage indiscriminately including illegal activity.

And whole-heartedly agree here:

@neverending_manga

Of course, it should be pointed out that if government decides that it has a bone to pick with maidsafe, than all bets are off, as the thugs in blue will go after random safenet users/developers and just invent shit as they go along.

[optictopic]

This is a great experiment and its creation should not hinge on FUD. People who harm innocent people for profit on the network will be caught the old fashion way and there ill gotten gains will be seized the old fashion way. For those who cant sleep at night because the thought that their drives may be holding little evil bits can ban together and fork the network to create a moderated safe-like censor approved network.