Recently, news related to Japanese content platforms has been a hot topic in the crypto community, and some quite interesting points have emerged.

There’s news that the founder of FC2 was arrested at Kansai International Airport, but the reason is suspected distribution of uncensored videos. He had been wanted internationally since 2013, but was only arrested now. According to him, since 2015, he had been traveling around the world and couldn’t return to Japan. He was reportedly arrested upon returning from Korea yesterday.

This news itself has sparked polarized reactions within Japanese society, but what’s important for the crypto industry is what comes next. This case has reignited the debate over the “tool guilt” argument.

In other words, the question of whether developers of platforms or tools should be arrested just because they were used for illegal purposes. Some Japanese internet users point out the same logic as, for example, someone who manufactures guns not being arrested, while only the person who kills with the gun is convicted. Or why, even though porn content is posted on X, only FC2’s founder is arrested.

This directly relates to the crypto industry because of the Tornado Cash incident. Tornado Cash, developed as a mixing tool, was suspected of being used for money laundering by North Korean hackers, leading to the founders being indicted. One of them was sentenced to 64 months in prison.

There’s also the Winny case from the past. Developers of P2P software were arrested and prosecuted because their software was used for copyright infringement. Similar debates arose at that time as well.

What’s concerning here is the trend where, even if the tool itself isn’t illegal, developers can be held responsible depending on how it’s used. If this continues, it could impact the incentives for open-source developers. The Japanese online community is also calling for a review of laws related to the “tool guilt” argument.

For the crypto industry, this trend cannot be ignored. Developers of privacy tools and mixing protocols could face the same risks. It’s a critical issue to watch as the legal framework evolves.