[spain]

A "good kid" who breaks the rules isn't a "good kid", it's a bad one. If the parents never found out about the child spending the money, then the blame would not fall on them. However I don't consider this a very likely scenario not only because money doesn't tend to vanish into thin air, but because a responsible parent would monitor their child's spending. They might be able to get away with it for a while, but eventually they'll find out. If they gave them a $5000 check then they can't just forget about it, it doesn't magically vanish from under their noses. Even if they do just give the check and forget about it, it is again, their fault and theirs alone. They caused the scenario in which they couldn't monitor the child's spending. They can't assume the child will act responsibly; they need to monitor their spending. Kids aren't the exact molds their parents have shaped, but they should at least be taught basic survival skills, such as the ability to spend money responsibly.

[x0x0]

And in the meantime, their child (like my niece) might have clicked her way through $300+ of scummy iap that my sister didn't realize was hooked up to her credit card. People who facilitate kids spending money without their parents permission are not good people, even though the parents have the duty to supervise children. To take this to it's logical conclusion, it's the same reason that -- though parents are legally required to supervise kids -- we also put fences around attractive nuisances like pools, and throw pool owners in prison if they don't.

[qbrass]

Pools don't come with fences.

In your own analogy, your sister would be the one who bought the dangerous device and left her kid unsupervised with it.

[TeMPOraL]

Device that is not dangerous by itself and wasn't dangerous at all until recently - the danger is created by people who want to monetize kids. There's malicious intent there.

A better analogy would be a kid getting mugged on it's way to school. Should we blame parents and parents only for leaving the kid unsupervised? Should we let the robber go because "it's parents responsibility to protect their child from danger"?