this post was submitted on 03 May 2026
724 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

84409 readers
4050 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

I don’t see how they are going to prove that though. The website is going to say they sent the packets to someone in Russia (or wherever the vpn is.)

They don't have to.

What the law does is remove the ability for the company to apply the defense 'I knew they were located in Russia'.

The State only has to prove two elements 1. The person was physically in Utah and 2. That they did business.

This law makes it so that there is no 'I didn't know' defense.

My point is, I don’t even see how they can selectively enforce this.

A State investigator makes an account, uses a VPN, and 'does business with' the site.

When they bring the case to court. The site is guilty because they can prove that the investigator was in Utah and that they did business with the site.

States love to do this, they remove the mens rea (guilty mind) element so that you're guilty regardless of your knowledge or intent.