4 ms·

I'm not even sure where to start here. FedEx knows that CSAM is sent using its services in the same way that Apple does. That is to say that both companies kno

I'm not even sure where to start here. FedEx knows that CSAM is sent using its services in the same way that Apple does. That is to say that both companies know that CSAM has been sent historically and both know that is possible to send that type of material using its services, and one could argue that they should assume that their services are used to transfer that data. Why does one of these companies have to go to such great depths to search out and report these materials and the other does not? If we suggest that Apple "knows" about CSAM on their network, we must also accept that Apple "knows" about many other crimes in which the devices they are sell are used in the planning and execution of those crimes. Why are they only focused on CSAM if they'd also have legal exposure in these other crimes simply for being a hardware and service provider? Lastly, to suggest that Apple "conspires" to transmit this content is wholly inaccurate. Conspiracy implies two or more parties are in explicit agreement to commit a crime.

treis 5y ago
>If we suggest that Apple "knows" about CSAM on their network, we must also accept that Apple "knows" about many other crimes in which the devices they are sell are used in the planning and execution of those crimes. Why are they only focused on CSAM if they'd also have legal exposure in these other crimes simply for being a hardware and service provider? It's not knowledge of a crime. Apple is committing a crime by possessing and distributing CSAM. >Lastly, to suggest that Apple "conspires" to transmit this content is wholly inaccurate. Conspiracy implies two or more parties are in explicit agreement to commit a crime. But that is exactly what they're doing. They are agreeing to possess and deliver images of which they know a portion are CSAM.
- brandon272 5y ago
  > Apple is committing a crime by possessing and distributing CSAM. Apple's liability for content is limited by Section 230. If they find out about specific instances of CSAM on their servers they are required to remove it. They are not required to hunt for it or otherwise search it out. They are not required to scan for it. Anything currently being done in that regard is voluntary. > But that is exactly what they're doing. They are agreeing to possess and deliver images of which they know a portion are CSAM. When you use Apple's cloud services, you agree to multiple legally binding agreements that include provisions about not using their cloud services to store or transmit illegal materials including CSAM. Someone using Apple's services to do that in contravention of those agreements does not constitute them "agreeing to possess and deliver" that content. What WOULD constitute them conspiracy and them agreeing to possess and deliver that content would be if they were informed of the specific instance of content being transmitted and delivered and did nothing about it or otherwise enabled its continued storage and distribution.

treis 5y ago

>If we suggest that Apple "knows" about CSAM on their network, we must also accept that Apple "knows" about many other crimes in which the devices they are sell are used in the planning and execution of those crimes. Why are they only focused on CSAM if they'd also have legal exposure in these other crimes simply for being a hardware and service provider? It's not knowledge of a crime. Apple is committing a crime by possessing and distributing CSAM. >Lastly, to suggest that Apple "conspires" to transmit this content is wholly inaccurate. Conspiracy implies two or more parties are in explicit agreement to commit a crime. But that is exactly what they're doing. They are agreeing to possess and deliver images of which they know a portion are CSAM.

brandon272 5y ago
> Apple is committing a crime by possessing and distributing CSAM. Apple's liability for content is limited by Section 230. If they find out about specific instances of CSAM on their servers they are required to remove it. They are not required to hunt for it or otherwise search it out. They are not required to scan for it. Anything currently being done in that regard is voluntary. > But that is exactly what they're doing. They are agreeing to possess and deliver images of which they know a portion are CSAM. When you use Apple's cloud services, you agree to multiple legally binding agreements that include provisions about not using their cloud services to store or transmit illegal materials including CSAM. Someone using Apple's services to do that in contravention of those agreements does not constitute them "agreeing to possess and deliver" that content. What WOULD constitute them conspiracy and them agreeing to possess and deliver that content would be if they were informed of the specific instance of content being transmitted and delivered and did nothing about it or otherwise enabled its continued storage and distribution.