Why though? Why is it unreasonable to expect a company to have some level of responsibility for serving clients that are using their platform for illegal activity?

It the same thing with social media and moderation. We don't have to let them off the hook just because doing the right thing would make them unprofitable.

▲

dminik 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean, how do we qualify which companies get punished for which crimes?

Do we punish gun manufacturers for someone being shot? Kitchen utensil companies for someone being stabbed? Car manufacturers for car crashes? Road construction companies for human trafficking?

How deep does this go? Is a steel foundry responsible for the stabbing? Is a camera lens manufacturer responsible for illegal porn?

	▲	jeppester 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That is something we'll need to figure out. Just because it requires some work to figure out where to draw the line, it doesn't make it wrong to draw one. Banks are generally required to check that their customers are not laundering money. In a lot of countries it's illegal to buy or sell goods that you know are very likely stolen. It don't think it's outrageous to expect more action from Cloudflare when they must know that their service is used for protecting criminal sites. Relatedly I'd want the betting companies whose ads are shown on these illegal pages to have some amount of responsibility for where their ads are shown, and the same goes for well-renowned websites that show clearly deceiving ads.