My thoughts immediately went to a hypothetical ethical question. Suppose that a ransomware threat actor saw the NBC story, felt bad that this happened to Lincoln, and offered to make (anonymously) the "transformational donation" mentioned in the story, while making clear that the source of funds was ransom received from other victims. Should Lincoln accept the money? (In other words, there's a yin and yang situation…
Rephrased more generally, is it ethical to accept donations arising from criminal enterprises? I think most people would say that the answer is no. This topic has been widely discussed on HN with regards to the MIT Media lab accepting money from Epstein.
(A) The government tracks down the ransomware guy, seizes his assets, and decides that $50 million is Lincoln's fair share to reimburse Lincoln's losses (8 of 8 would take the money).
(B) Lincoln tracks down the ransomware guy, takes him to court, and wins a civil judgment of $50 million (8 of 8 would take the money).
(C) Lincoln tracks down the ransomware guy, their lawyers show proof of Lincoln's losses and how much they could potentially win in a civil trial, and the parties agree to a $50 million out-of-court settlement (7 of 8 would take the money).
(D) A ransomware criminal proactively contacts Lincoln, the criminal won't comment on whether he had any role in harming Lincoln (and Lincoln doesn't know either), but the criminal offers to donate $50 million to Lincoln anyway (2 of 8 would take the money).