There’s a thing called know you customer (KYC) law. You can in fact be held liable if you can’t prove you sufficiently vetted a customer before engaging in a transaction with them. Saying that you’re right there’s only so much they can do after vetting.
But like is Huang supposed to personally vet every customer, seem preposterous. The only real culpability angle is if Huang influenced the process to not vet this specific customer due the ongoing relationship not if nvidia compliance office was systematically undervet companies the disenfranchised is subtle but the framing is important because changes the kind of proof the market will expect