Legal to act as intermediary for something illegal?

What is the name of your state? CALIFORNIA, USA

I'm planning to start a service where I will refer people to sources of illegal drugs. I will have no affiliation to the source, but I will charge, for myself, a service fee.

Is this legal? It'll look something like this

CONSUMER goes to MYSERVICE and MYSERVICE offers information to SOURCE that CONSUMER is looking for.

MYSERVICE charges a fee for DISCOVERING the SOURCE for the CONSUMER.

The ACTUAL illegal substance will NEVER PASS through my hands.

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

ipstudent said:

What is the name of your state? CALIFORNIA, USA

I'm planning to start a service where I will refer people to sources of illegal drugs. I will have no affiliation to the source, but I will charge, for myself, a service fee.

Is this legal? It'll look something like this

CONSUMER goes to MYSERVICE and MYSERVICE offers information to SOURCE that CONSUMER is looking for.

MYSERVICE charges a fee for DISCOVERING the SOURCE for the CONSUMER.

The ACTUAL illegal substance will NEVER PASS through my hands.

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

**A: yes, it is ok. Please register your company with the nearest DEA office and get a Federal business license.

Serious replies anyone? Or any thoughts? Similar circumstances that have occured in the past? No similar circumstances?

I appreciate any serious replies.

Ask IAAL.

HomeGuru said:

Ask IAAL.

Click to expand...

Homeguru, WHOIS IAAL?

He is my evil twin...

And if he shows up he'll rip you a new a$$hole.

Does the word STUPID have any meaning for you?

How about the word Facilitation?

How about Bubba and the Four Tenors?

This is the most idiotic, assinine and any other word I can think of at the moment, question I've seen on this board for a long time.

And the serious answer is YES STUPID, It's illegal.

Geeez, I would ask you if you just fell off the turnip truck but I would never insult a turnip that way.

I would like to formally enter this thread as the FA thread of the quarter.

You definately get my vote.

Especially since this guy thinks it's a serious subject

Hexeliebe:

1. "He is my evil twin...

And if he shows up he'll rip you a new a$$hole.

Does the word STUPID have any meaning for you?

How about the word Facilitation?

How about Bubba and the Four Tenors?

This is the most idiotic, assinine and any other word I can think of at the moment, question I've seen on this board for a long time.

And the serious answer is YES STUPID, It's illegal.

Geeez, I would ask you if you just fell off the turnip truck but I would never insult a turnip that way."

Very kind of you to respond in such as ASSININE way to such an, according to you, an ASSININE question.

2. Now the actual discussion begins. Further questions, first, regarding FACILITATION, take a look at www.newshosting.com or www.easynews.com, they facilitate Child Pornography, Pirated Software, Pirated Motion Pictures, Pirated Photographs, etc. Newshosting.com and Easynews.com assert that the content posted in newsgroups are posted by other users and therefore it is not their responsibility, they are merely an INTERMEDIARY between USER and NEWSGROUP to provide access.

* Does this imply that www.newshosting.com and www.easynews.com are guilty of facilitating and harboring illegal software/movies/images?

3. Any serious thoughts on this statement? I believe that these Companies ARE responsible for the content because they are (1) aware or should be aware by all of the cease and desists that come in, (2) store it on their system and provide users an easy method to access the illegal material, and (3) are aware that the majority of their clients use their service for this sole purpose. (3) can be inferred from the fact that these Companies are making their download processes for large files easier and faster.

Serious thoughts? Read my original post, do you see the similarity? In this case, the illegal material is actually passes through the hands of Newshosting.com and Easynews.com.

O.K. you really did fall off the turnip truck.

O.K. first read this:

http://www.easynews.com/copyright.html

The sites you listed are legitimate access sites who do nothing to 'facilitate' as you stated in your original post, the commission of a crime.

Following your logic, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and any other news organization that has covered the recent piracy cases could be held to this standard. And that's just not true.

Now, since you pointed people to your original post for clarification let's look at it. Follow me here.

I'm planning to start a service where I will refer people to sources of illegal drugs. I will have no affiliation to the source, but I will charge, for myself, a service fee.

Click to expand...

O.K. there is a BIG difference between opening an access service for people to talk about illegal drugs with a byproduct that they 'may' discuss where to find them, and 'pointing' them to the source. The former is a first ammendment right of the provider and participants. The latter is facilitation.

But even the former does not give the provider of the service carte blanc. There is some responsibility to mitigate the damages such disucssion can have such as the URL I posted.

CONSUMER goes to MYSERVICE and MYSERVICE offers information to SOURCE that CONSUMER is looking for.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you want to be a pimp. Listen, using the above scenario you are a direct link to the drugs. Without you the consumer could not find them and if you charge a fee for your service then not only are you a facilitator, but you will also be charged with trafficking.

The ACTUAL illegal substance will NEVER PASS through my hands.

Click to expand...

So what? Do you want to lose your home, your car, your freedom and anything you may own just because the drugs never touched your hands? Guess again Tonto. The drugs never have to touch you for you to be found guilty of trafficking.

get real. You're headed to a jail cell and all your cute logic won't stop a prosecutor and the DEA from popping your ass.

1. Let's change the source from DRUGS to PIRATED SOFTWARE. Would your statements still be true Hexeliebe?

2. Have you actually subscribed and looked at Newshosting.com or Easynews.com lately? With Newshosting.com, you can't even look at regular discussions. You only have access to binary files, not actual usenet postings.

3. Would you say it is Newshosting.com's and Easynews.com's responsbility to monitor what they're providing access to? I can list several newsgroups on Usenet that more than 1,000 pirated software titles.

4. "Sounds like you want to be a pimp. Listen, using the above scenario you are a direct link to the drugs. Without you the consumer could not find them and if you charge a fee for your service then not only are you a facilitator, but you will also be charged with trafficking."
So doesn't this imply that Newshosting.com and Easynews.com are trafficking? Indeed, without newshosting.com and easynews.com, services developed for people who are looking to download binaries, users would not be able to access the infringing material?

Thanks for taking yoru time, i'm interested in hearing more input from you.

And I am interested in hearing more from hexy also.

Indeed, without newshosting.com and easynews.com, services developed for people who are looking to download binaries, users would not be able to access the infringing material?

Click to expand...

And that's the fallacy in your argument. Both of these sites simply compile a listing of newsgroups that already exist. They do not actively go out searching for, as you put it "the source".

You are comparing apples and oranges here.

What happened to your original statement: "I'm planning to start a service where I will refer people to sources of illegal drugs."

Either stick with your statement and defend it or move on. I'm not getting into a 'what if' debate with you. Because we'd be here all year while you change the premis to fit whatever twisted idea you want.

The plain fact is, based on the original premis that you stated, you would be found guilty of at the minimum facilitation.

Hexliebe -- This was my original intention. I'm trying to understand WHY these web-based newsgroups sites are legal. They are centralizing all of the newsgroups in one place and providing their users access to it.

Can you answer the questions addressed in my previous post?

It's my thought that even though these Usenet sites are not outright stating that "Look, I have pirated software all over hte place and I even have a web-based application that allows you to easily download it!" they should still be held responsible for the content on their servers. I don't feel that these Usenet sites are employing reasonable means to monitor their content. They are putting all of the weight on the shoulders of the copyright owners.

Thoughts?

ip:
Are you having trouble getting a job?