Hacker News Reader

> E.g. what if the liability was solely with the person who sold me the wood (even if they’re actually “innocent” and simply bought from a fraudulent distributor).

Why would the liability stop with them and not you? If only the last person in the chain is liable, the shouldn’t it be you who is sued by the people whose land was exploited for lumber?

View on HN

Because you didn't order the illegal Acacia?

It's not like elephant ivory - the wood can come from a number of places and look about the same. As an end user you asked for "wood floors" and you got wood floors, and it was up to the supplier to select the wood used in the flooring, while the supplier is also lying about the source so all parties post-supplier have deniability here, no?

How do you know the supplier didn't order "legally harvested" wood? If they did, then why is it more appropriate to hold them liable than the end user?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com