Justice Kagan Questions Lawyer on ISP Intent for Aiding Illegal Acts

Clarifying Legal Standards for ISPs

• 💡 Justice Elena Kagan sought to clarify the legal standard regarding whether an Internet Service Provider (ISP) has intent when providing services that facilitate illegal user activity.
• 🎯 The core question revolves around whether knowledge of user infringement is sufficient, or if a more active desire for the illegal act to occur is required.

Intent Under Common Law

• 🧠 Kagan probed the definition of intent, contrasting mere knowledge of a user's actions with a requirement to want the illegal act to occur.
• ⚖️ The discussion referenced common law principles of aiding and abetting, which are considered intentional torts.
• 📜 The Restatement (Second) of Torts, Section 8A, was cited as a governing definition of intent at the time relevant acts were passed.

Proving Intent

• 📌 Intent can be shown in two ways under common law: by demonstrating a purpose to carry out the primary wrongdoer's purpose, or by providing a service knowing that certain results are substantially certain to occur.
• ⚠️ The latter, knowing that results are substantially certain, is legally equivalent to intent, even if the provider doesn't actively desire the outcome.