Saying You Have An Open WiFi AP May Not Help You Beat Child Porn Charges
from the what-would-matlock-do dept
While there would seem to be room for some doubt in all of this, the appeals court rightly noted that the level of proof needed for a warrant is much lower than that needed for a conviction, and the fact that child porn was sent from his IP is a reasonable basis to issue the search warrant. This case would appear to have some slight parallels to some of the RIAA's cases against file-sharers, where it simply goes after whoever holds the ISP account without making any effort to identify the actual copyright infringer. This idea of secondary liability isn't standing up for the RIAA, but it's a little different than what's being argued here. The charges against this man weren't based on what was sent from his ISP account; rather the FBI used that as the basis for an investigation that resulted in charges based on materials found in the guy's house. The RIAA, of course, doesn't really bother so much with the investigation part, preferring instead just to hit anybody they can with a lawsuit. One more twist to the child porn case: the guy entered a guilty plea to the charges, pending the outcome of this appeal. Arguing that you shouldn't have been caught, and not that you didn't do it, probably doesn't help your case much.