He can try to justify it however he likes -- its selling stolen goods. Just because you sell stolen goods under their value, or under your costs to provide does not suddenly make it ok.
Oh come on. It is plainly evident that he is not "selling stolen goods". He is providing a valuable public service merely checking whether people are caught up in those "stolen goods" and the context in which it occurred. In these changes, he is seeking only to recover his costs and reduce the time he spends administrating it, which he has done at absolutely no charge for 5+ years.
You are quite simply wrong and you should just admit it, rather than repeating your ludicrous claims in ever more hysterical terms.
You are quite simply wrong and you should just admit it, rather than repeating your ludicrous claims in ever more hysterical terms.