2 ms·

This is the text of the current law in the U.S. [1]. Alerting authorities about CP is required if discovered. Actively searching for CP is not required. Look fo

This is the text of the current law in the U.S. [1]. Alerting authorities about CP is required if discovered. Actively searching for CP is not required. Look for the aptly named "protection of privacy" paragraph. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258A https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258A

nonbirithm 5y ago
There might not be a law, but in practice, letting criminals host illegal data on your servers is unlikely to be a good look. The intent of the laws making the possession CSAM illegal are ultimately to stop the spread of CSAM. If those laws fail in their stated purpose just because a company chooses not to be proactive in how it searches for the material, that would be missing the point. The media and governmental pressure would wipe any company foolish enough not to implement child safety measures out of existence, but no major tech company is that foolish (except Kik perhaps). And hypothetically, the government could just pass a law enforcing proactive scanning if there were to exist a company that chose not to proactively scan, which would mean that the government would fail to solve the issue of preventing the spread of CSAM, and thus CSA. But in practice, such a law isn't needed. No company wants to be derided as a service that allows child abusers to get away with their crimes.
somenewaccount1 5y ago
(f)Protection of Privacy. —Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a provider to —(1)monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider; (2)monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or (3)affirmatively search, screen, or scan for facts or circumstances described in sections (a) and (b). Hrm, that's interesting. I wonder if Apple iCloud has surfaced in enough cases as where criminal activity is actively taking place that it prompted Apple to do something about it.

nonbirithm 5y ago

There might not be a law, but in practice, letting criminals host illegal data on your servers is unlikely to be a good look. The intent of the laws making the possession CSAM illegal are ultimately to stop the spread of CSAM. If those laws fail in their stated purpose just because a company chooses not to be proactive in how it searches for the material, that would be missing the point. The media and governmental pressure would wipe any company foolish enough not to implement child safety measures out of existence, but no major tech company is that foolish (except Kik perhaps). And hypothetically, the government could just pass a law enforcing proactive scanning if there were to exist a company that chose not to proactively scan, which would mean that the government would fail to solve the issue of preventing the spread of CSAM, and thus CSA. But in practice, such a law isn't needed. No company wants to be derided as a service that allows child abusers to get away with their crimes.

somenewaccount1 5y ago

(f)Protection of Privacy. —Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a provider to —(1)monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider; (2)monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or (3)affirmatively search, screen, or scan for facts or circumstances described in sections (a) and (b). Hrm, that's interesting. I wonder if Apple iCloud has surfaced in enough cases as where criminal activity is actively taking place that it prompted Apple to do something about it.