Porn is definitely promoted on the Interent... but I don't think it is accurate to say that The Interent promotes porn. Or that the Internet was designed to enable porn.

So... reasonable people observed that Google profits off piracy... and that leads to the conclusion that "open devices are designed to enable piracy"?

>Your last sentence is a non sequitur.

Side note: Interesting that non sequitur has two different uses that make you either wrong or right depending on which you were using.

If you are thinking of it as a literary device because of its apparent lack of meaning relative to what preceded it, then I would say you are wrong. It is an example of how the formula THIS has a lot of THAT, therefore THIS promotes THAT is not an accurate formula. I believe it to be a relevant example, therefore not a non sequitur (literary device)

If you are thinking of it in terms of logic because its conclusion does not follow from its premises, then I would say you are right... because that was the whole point of giving those examples. The premise of THIS has a lot of THAT is not sufficient to make the conclusion that THIS promotes THAT. It almost never is. So... yes, a non sequitur (logic).