3 ms·

Why is that supposed to be their responsibility? They (and Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc.) are essentially mandated reporters; if CSAM is on their servers,

Why is that supposed to be their responsibility? They (and Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc.) are essentially mandated reporters; if CSAM is on their servers, they're required to report it. It's like how a doctor is a mandated reporter regarding physical abuse and other issues. Because they're not the police. It isn't their role to enforce the law. They're not enforcing the law; if the CSAM reaches a certain threshold, they check it out and if it's the real deal, they report to National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC); they get law enforcement involved if necessary.

kelnos 5y ago
> They (and Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc.) are essentially mandated reporters; if CSAM is on their servers, they're required to report it. I don't think that's correct. My understanding is that if they find CSAM, they're obligated to report it (just like anyone is). I don't believe they are legally obligated to proactively look for it. (It would be a PR nightmare for them to have an unchecked CSAM problem on their services, so they do look for it and report it.) Consider that Apple likely does have CSAM on their servers, because they apparently don't scan iCloud backups right now. I don't believe they're breaking any laws, at least until and unless they find any of it and (hypothetically) don't report it
- kmeisthax 5y ago
  Last year Congress mulled over a bill (EARN IT Act) that would explicitly require online services to proactively search for CSAM, by allowing services to be sued by governments for failing to do so. It would also allow services to be sued for failing to provide law-enforcement back doors to encrypted data. There's also SESTA/FOSTA, already in law, that rescinded CDA 230 protection for cases involving sex trafficking. Quite honestly, my opinion is that any service not scanning for CSAM is living on borrowed time.

kelnos 5y ago

> They (and Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc.) are essentially mandated reporters; if CSAM is on their servers, they're required to report it. I don't think that's correct. My understanding is that if they find CSAM, they're obligated to report it (just like anyone is). I don't believe they are legally obligated to proactively look for it. (It would be a PR nightmare for them to have an unchecked CSAM problem on their services, so they do look for it and report it.) Consider that Apple likely does have CSAM on their servers, because they apparently don't scan iCloud backups right now. I don't believe they're breaking any laws, at least until and unless they find any of it and (hypothetically) don't report it

kmeisthax 5y ago
Last year Congress mulled over a bill (EARN IT Act) that would explicitly require online services to proactively search for CSAM, by allowing services to be sued by governments for failing to do so. It would also allow services to be sued for failing to provide law-enforcement back doors to encrypted data. There's also SESTA/FOSTA, already in law, that rescinded CDA 230 protection for cases involving sex trafficking. Quite honestly, my opinion is that any service not scanning for CSAM is living on borrowed time.