Oh no, a website for hackers. is hacker news a website for hackers, how about slashdot? If you are responsible for what people use your software for, even when you actively tell people not to do that, then it should also be true for guns, alchol (kids drink your bud beer, so arrest budweiser execs?).
This is one of those fundamental questions, similar to do you own physical devices or just run the software on them, like the tractors. It should be you aren't responsible for what people do with your software, if there is any legimiate use. The prosecutorial power of the us govt is very large, and they can coerce people to plead guilty to crimes where they weren't really responsible.
The article makes it pretty clear that this was "hack" in the criminal sense. The nature of the forum is a question of fact, and it sounds like the prosecution will have no difficulty in showing that lawbreaking was a major topic of conversation. With "Hacker News" on the other hand the hypothetical defense could easily demonstrate that it was for "hack" in the positive sense. Dictionaries routinely list both senses of the word.
Perhaps the forums he sold it in were focused on illegal activity, it was mixed in the article. But lets get back to this forum - I am sure that there is discussion of how to subvert drm on hacker news (search far enough and you'll see it), and that's illegal. So if you were on trial and they used your posting on hacker news against you, they'd definitely call it "evil scary bad hacker news".
This is one of those fundamental questions, similar to do you own physical devices or just run the software on them, like the tractors. It should be you aren't responsible for what people do with your software, if there is any legimiate use. The prosecutorial power of the us govt is very large, and they can coerce people to plead guilty to crimes where they weren't really responsible.