Online, Densmore was known in so-called “Sewer” communities under the alias “Rabid.” During their investigation, the FBI found that Densmore kept a collection of “child pornography and bloody images of ‘Rabid,’ ‘Sewer,’ and ‘764’ carved into victims’ limbs, in some cases with razor blades and boxcutters nearby.” He also sexually exploited children, the DOJ said, including paying another 764 member to coerce a young girl to send a nude video with “Rabid” written on her chest. Gaining attention for his livestreams, he would threaten to release the coerced abusive images if kids did not participate “on cam,” the DOJ said.
“I have all your information,” Densmore threatened one victim. “I own you …. You do what I say now, kitten.”
In a speech Thursday, Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen described 764 as a terrorist network working “to normalize and weaponize the possession, production, and distribution of child sexual abuse material and other types of graphic and violent material” online. Ultimately, by attacking children, the group wants to “destroy civil society” and “collapse the US government,” Olsen said.
People like Densmore, Olsen said, join 764 to inflate their “own sense of fame,” with many having “an end-goal of forcing their victims to commit suicide on livestream for the 764 network’s entertainment.”
In the DOJ’s press release, the FBI warned parents and caregivers to pay attention to their kids’ activity both online and off. In addition to watching out for behavioral shifts or signs of self-harm, caregivers should also take note of any suspicious packages arriving, as 764 sometimes ships kids “razor blades, sexual devices, gifts, and other materials to use in creating online content.” Parents should also encourage kids to discuss online activity, especially if they feel threatened.
“If you are worried about someone who might be self-harming or is at risk of suicide, please consult a health care professional or call 911 in the event of an immediate threat,” the DOJ said.
If you or someone you know is feeling suicidal or in distress, please call the Suicide Prevention Lifeline number, 1-800-273-TALK (8255), which will put you in touch with a local crisis center.
“I cannot accept this evidence without a much better explanation of Mr. Bogatz’s path of reasoning,” Wheelahan wrote.
Wheelahan emphasized that the Nevada merger law specifically stipulated that “all debts, liabilities, obligations and duties of the Company shall thenceforth remain with or be attached to, as the case may be, the Acquiror and may be enforced against it to the same extent as if it had incurred or contracted all such debts, liabilities, obligations, and duties.” And Bogatz’s testimony failed to “grapple with the significance” of this, Wheelahan said.
Overall, Wheelahan considered Bogatz’s testimony on X’s merger-acquired liabilities “strained,” while deeming the government’s US merger law expert Alexander Pyle to be “honest and ready to make appropriate concessions,” even while some of his testimony was “not of assistance.”
Luckily, it seemed that Wheelahan had no trouble drawing his own conclusion after analyzing Nevada’s merger law.
“I find that a Nevada court would likely hold that the word ‘liabilities'” in the merger law “is broad enough on its proper construction under Nevada law to encompass non-pecuniary liabilities, such as the obligation to respond to the reporting notice,” Wheelahan wrote. “X Corp has therefore failed to show that it was not required to respond to the reporting notice.”
Because X “failed on all its claims,” the social media company must cover costs from the appeal, and X’s costs in fighting the initial fine will seemingly only increase from here.
Fighting fine likely to more than double X costs
In a press release celebrating the ruling, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant criticized X’s attempt to use the merger to avoid complying with Australia’s Online Safety Act.
Cops are now using AI to generate images of fake kids, which are helping them catch child predators online, a lawsuit filed by the state of New Mexico against Snapchat revealed this week.
According to the complaint, the New Mexico Department of Justice launched an undercover investigation in recent months to prove that Snapchat “is a primary social media platform for sharing child sexual abuse material (CSAM)” and sextortion of minors, because its “algorithm serves up children to adult predators.”
As part of their probe, an investigator “set up a decoy account for a 14-year-old girl, Sexy14Heather.”
Despite Snapchat setting the fake minor’s profile to private and the account not adding any followers, “Heather” was soon recommended widely to “dangerous accounts, including ones named ‘child.rape’ and ‘pedo_lover10,’ in addition to others that are even more explicit,” the New Mexico DOJ said in a press release.
And after “Heather” accepted a follow request from just one account, the recommendations got even worse. “Snapchat suggested over 91 users, including numerous adult users whose accounts included or sought to exchange sexually explicit content,” New Mexico’s complaint alleged.
“Snapchat is a breeding ground for predators to collect sexually explicit images of children and to find, groom, and extort them,” New Mexico’s complaint alleged.
Posing as “Sexy14Heather,” the investigator swapped messages with adult accounts, including users who “sent inappropriate messages and explicit photos.” In one exchange with a user named “50+ SNGL DAD 4 YNGR,” the fake teen “noted her age, sent a photo, and complained about her parents making her go to school,” prompting the user to send “his own photo” as well as sexually suggestive chats. Other accounts asked “Heather” to “trade presumably explicit content,” and several “attempted to coerce the underage persona into sharing CSAM,” the New Mexico DOJ said.
“Heather” also tested out Snapchat’s search tool, finding that “even though she used no sexually explicit language, the algorithm must have determined that she was looking for CSAM” when she searched for other teen users. It “began recommending users associated with trading” CSAM, including accounts with usernames such as “naughtypics,” “addfortrading,” “teentr3de,” “gayhorny13yox,” and “teentradevirgin,” the investigation found, “suggesting that these accounts also were involved in the dissemination of CSAM.”
This novel use of AI was prompted after Albuquerque police indicted a man, Alejandro Marquez, who pled guilty and was sentenced to 18 years for raping an 11-year-old girl he met through Snapchat’s Quick Add feature in 2022, New Mexico’s complaint said. More recently, the New Mexico complaint said, an Albuquerque man, Jeremy Guthrie, was arrested and sentenced this summer for “raping a 12-year-old girl who he met and cultivated over Snapchat.”
In the past, police have posed as kids online to catch child predators using photos of younger-looking adult women or even younger photos of police officers. Using AI-generated images could be considered a more ethical way to conduct these stings, a lawyer specializing in sex crimes, Carrie Goldberg, told Ars, because “an AI decoy profile is less problematic than using images of an actual child.”
But using AI could complicate investigations and carry its own ethical concerns, Goldberg warned, as child safety experts and law enforcement warn that the Internet is increasingly swamped with AI-generated CSAM.
“In terms of AI being used for entrapment, defendants can defend themselves if they say the government induced them to commit a crime that they were not already predisposed to commit,” Goldberg told Ars. “Of course, it would be ethically concerning if the government were to create deepfake AI child sexual abuse material (CSAM), because those images are illegal, and we don’t want more CSAM in circulation.”
Experts have warned that AI image generators should never be trained on datasets that combine images of real kids with explicit content to avoid any instances of AI-generated CSAM, which is particularly harmful when it appears to depict a real kid or an actual victim of child abuse.
In the New Mexico complaint, only one AI-generated image is included, so it’s unclear how widely the state’s DOJ is using AI or if cops are possibly using more advanced methods to generate multiple images of the same fake kid. It’s also unclear what ethical concerns were weighed before cops began using AI decoys.
The New Mexico DOJ did not respond to Ars’ request for comment.
Goldberg told Ars that “there ought to be standards within law enforcement with how to use AI responsibly,” warning that “we are likely to see more entrapment defenses centered around AI if the government is using the technology in a manipulative way to pressure somebody into committing a crime.”
Now, the LAION (Large-scale Artificial Intelligence Open Network) team has released a scrubbed version of the LAION-5B dataset called Re-LAION-5B and claimed that it “is the first web-scale, text-link to images pair dataset to be thoroughly cleaned of known links to suspected CSAM.”
To scrub the dataset, LAION partnered with the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) and the Canadian Center for Child Protection (C3P) to remove 2,236 links that matched with hashed images in the online safety organizations’ databases. Removals include all the links flagged by Thiel, as well as content flagged by LAION’s partners and other watchdogs, like Human Rights Watch, which warned of privacy issues after finding photos of real kids included in the dataset without their consent.
In his study, Thiel warned that “the inclusion of child abuse material in AI model training data teaches tools to associate children in illicit sexual activity and uses known child abuse images to generate new, potentially realistic child abuse content.”
Thiel urged LAION and other researchers scraping the Internet for AI training data that a new safety standard was needed to better filter out not just CSAM, but any explicit imagery that could be combined with photos of children to generate CSAM. (Recently, the US Department of Justice pointedly said that “CSAM generated by AI is still CSAM.”)
While LAION’s new dataset won’t alter models that were trained on the prior dataset, LAION claimed that Re-LAION-5B sets “a new safety standard for cleaning web-scale image-link datasets.” Where before illegal content “slipped through” LAION’s filters, the researchers have now developed an improved new system “for identifying and removing illegal content,” LAION’s blog said.
Thiel told Ars that he would agree that LAION has set a new safety standard with its latest release, but “there are absolutely ways to improve it.” However, “those methods would require possession of all original images or a brand new crawl,” and LAION’s post made clear that it only utilized image hashes and did not conduct a new crawl that could have risked pulling in more illegal or sensitive content. (On Threads, Thiel shared more in-depth impressions of LAION’s effort to clean the dataset.)
LAION warned that “current state-of-the-art filters alone are not reliable enough to guarantee protection from CSAM in web scale data composition scenarios.”
“To ensure better filtering, lists of hashes of suspected links or images created by expert organizations (in our case, IWF and C3P) are suitable choices,” LAION’s blog said. “We recommend research labs and any other organizations composing datasets from the public web to partner with organizations like IWF and C3P to obtain such hash lists and use those for filtering. In the longer term, a larger common initiative can be created that makes such hash lists available for the research community working on dataset composition from web.”
According to LAION, the bigger concern is that some links to known CSAM scraped into a 2022 dataset are still active more than a year later.
“It is a clear hint that law enforcement bodies have to intensify the efforts to take down domains that host such image content on public web following information and recommendations by organizations like IWF and C3P, making it a safer place, also for various kinds of research related activities,” LAION’s blog said.
HRW researcher Hye Jung Han praised LAION for removing sensitive data that she flagged, while also urging more interventions.
“LAION’s responsive removal of some children’s personal photos from their dataset is very welcome, and will help to protect these children from their likenesses being misused by AI systems,” Han told Ars. “It’s now up to governments to pass child data protection laws that would protect all children’s privacy online.”
Although LAION’s blog said that the content removals represented an “upper bound” of CSAM that existed in the initial dataset, AI specialist and Creative.AI co-founder Alex Champandard told Ars that he’s skeptical that all CSAM was removed.
“They only filter out previously identified CSAM, which is only a partial solution,” Champandard told Ars. “Statistically speaking, most instances of CSAM have likely never been reported nor investigated by C3P or IWF. A more reasonable estimate of the problem is about 25,000 instances of things you’d never want to train generative models on—maybe even 50,000.”
Champandard agreed with Han that more regulations are needed to protect people from AI harms when training data is scraped from the web.
“There’s room for improvement on all fronts: privacy, copyright, illegal content, etc.,” Champandard said. Because “there are too many data rights being broken with such web-scraped datasets,” Champandard suggested that datasets like LAION’s won’t “stand the test of time.”
“LAION is simply operating in the regulatory gap and lag in the judiciary system until policymakers realize the magnitude of the problem,” Champandard said.
San Francisco’s city attorney David Chiu is suing to shut down 16 of the most popular websites and apps allowing users to “nudify” or “undress” photos of mostly women and girls who have been increasingly harassed and exploited by bad actors online.
These sites, Chiu’s suit claimed, are “intentionally” designed to “create fake, nude images of women and girls without their consent,” boasting that any users can upload any photo to “see anyone naked” by using tech that realistically swaps the faces of real victims onto AI-generated explicit images.
“In California and across the country, there has been a stark increase in the number of women and girls harassed and victimized by AI-generated” non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII) and “this distressing trend shows no sign of abating,” Chiu’s suit said.
“Given the widespread availability and popularity” of nudify websites, “San Franciscans and Californians face the threat that they or their loved ones may be victimized in this manner,” Chiu’s suit warned.
In a press conference, Chiu said that this “first-of-its-kind lawsuit” has been raised to defend not just Californians, but “a shocking number of women and girls across the globe”—from celebrities like Taylor Swift to middle and high school girls. Should the city official win, each nudify site risks fines of $2,500 for each violation of California consumer protection law found.
On top of media reports sounding alarms about the AI-generated harm, law enforcement has joined the call to ban so-called deepfakes.
Chiu said the harmful deepfakes are often created “by exploiting open-source AI image generation models,” such as earlier versions of Stable Diffusion, that can be honed or “fine-tuned” to easily “undress” photos of women and girls that are frequently yanked from social media. While later versions of Stable Diffusion make such “disturbing” forms of misuse much harder, San Francisco city officials noted at the press conference that fine-tunable earlier versions of Stable Diffusion are still widely available to be abused by bad actors.
In the US alone, cops are currently so bogged down by reports of fake AI child sex images that it’s making it hard to investigate child abuse cases offline, and these AI cases are expected to continue spiking “exponentially.” The AI abuse has spread so widely that “the FBI has warned of an uptick in extortion schemes using AI generated non-consensual pornography,” Chiu said at the press conference. “And the impact on victims has been devastating,” harming “their reputations and their mental health,” causing “loss of autonomy,” and “in some instances causing individuals to become suicidal.”
Suing on behalf of the people of the state of California, Chiu is seeking an injunction requiring nudify site owners to cease operation of “all websites they own or operate that are capable of creating AI-generated” non-consensual intimate imagery of identifiable individuals. It’s the only way, Chiu said, to hold these sites “accountable for creating and distributing AI-generated NCII of women and girls and for aiding and abetting others in perpetrating this conduct.”
He also wants an order requiring “any domain-name registrars, domain-name registries, webhosts, payment processors, or companies providing user authentication and authorization services or interfaces” to “restrain” nudify site operators from launching new sites to prevent any further misconduct.
Chiu’s suit redacts the names of the most harmful sites his investigation uncovered but claims that in the first six months of 2024, the sites “have been visited over 200 million times.”
While victims typically have little legal recourse, Chiu believes that state and federal laws prohibiting deepfake pornography, revenge pornography, and child pornography, as well as California’s unfair competition law, can be wielded to take down all 16 sites. Chiu expects that a win will serve as a warning to other nudify site operators that more takedowns are likely coming.
“We are bringing this lawsuit to get these websites shut down, but we also want to sound the alarm,” Chiu said at the press conference. “Generative AI has enormous promise, but as with all new technologies, there are unanticipated consequences and criminals seeking to exploit them. We must be clear that this is not innovation. This is sexual abuse.”
After years of controversies over plans to scan iCloud to find more child sexual abuse materials (CSAM), Apple abandoned those plans last year. Now, child safety experts have accused the tech giant of not only failing to flag CSAM exchanged and stored on its services—including iCloud, iMessage, and FaceTime—but also allegedly failing to report all the CSAM that is flagged.
The United Kingdom’s National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) shared UK police data with The Guardian showing that Apple is “vastly undercounting how often” CSAM is found globally on its services.
According to the NSPCC, police investigated more CSAM cases in just the UK alone in 2023 than Apple reported globally for the entire year. Between April 2022 and March 2023 in England and Wales, the NSPCC found, “Apple was implicated in 337 recorded offenses of child abuse images.” But in 2023, Apple only reported 267 instances of CSAM to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), supposedly representing all the CSAM on its platforms worldwide, The Guardian reported.
Large tech companies in the US must report CSAM to NCMEC when it’s found, but while Apple reports a couple hundred CSAM cases annually, its big tech peers like Meta and Google report millions, NCMEC’s report showed. Experts told The Guardian that there’s ongoing concern that Apple “clearly” undercounts CSAM on its platforms.
Richard Collard, the NSPCC’s head of child safety online policy, told The Guardian that he believes Apple’s child safety efforts need major improvements.
“There is a concerning discrepancy between the number of UK child abuse image crimes taking place on Apple’s services and the almost negligible number of global reports of abuse content they make to authorities,” Collard told The Guardian. “Apple is clearly behind many of their peers in tackling child sexual abuse when all tech firms should be investing in safety and preparing for the rollout of the Online Safety Act in the UK.”
Outside the UK, other child safety experts shared Collard’s concerns. Sarah Gardner, the CEO of a Los Angeles-based child protection organization called the Heat Initiative, told The Guardian that she considers Apple’s platforms a “black hole” obscuring CSAM. And she expects that Apple’s efforts to bring AI to its platforms will intensify the problem, potentially making it easier to spread AI-generated CSAM in an environment where sexual predators may expect less enforcement.
“Apple does not detect CSAM in the majority of its environments at scale, at all,” Gardner told The Guardian.
Gardner agreed with Collard that Apple is “clearly underreporting” and has “not invested in trust and safety teams to be able to handle this” as it rushes to bring sophisticated AI features to its platforms. Last month, Apple integrated ChatGPT into Siri, iOS and Mac OS, perhaps setting expectations for continually enhanced generative AI features to be touted in future Apple gear.
“The company is moving ahead to a territory that we know could be incredibly detrimental and dangerous to children without the track record of being able to handle it,” Gardner told The Guardian.
So far, Apple has not commented on the NSPCC’s report. Last September, Apple did respond to the Heat Initiative’s demands to detect more CSAM, saying that rather than focusing on scanning for illegal content, its focus is on connecting vulnerable or victimized users directly with local resources and law enforcement that can assist them in their communities.
A Spanish youth court has sentenced 15 minors to one year of probation after spreading AI-generated nude images of female classmates in two WhatsApp groups.
The minors were charged with 20 counts of creating child sex abuse images and 20 counts of offenses against their victims’ moral integrity. In addition to probation, the teens will also be required to attend classes on gender and equality, as well as on the “responsible use of information and communication technologies,” a press release from the Juvenile Court of Badajoz said.
Many of the victims were too ashamed to speak up when the inappropriate fake images began spreading last year. Prior to the sentencing, a mother of one of the victims told The Guardian that girls like her daughter “were completely terrified and had tremendous anxiety attacks because they were suffering this in silence.”
The court confirmed that the teens used artificial intelligence to create images where female classmates “appear naked” by swiping photos from their social media profiles and superimposing their faces on “other naked female bodies.”
Teens using AI to sexualize and harass classmates has become an alarming global trend. Police have probed disturbing cases in both high schools and middle schools in the US, and earlier this year, the European Union proposed expanding its definition of child sex abuse to more effectively “prosecute the production and dissemination of deepfakes and AI-generated material.” Last year, US President Joe Biden issued an executive order urging lawmakers to pass more protections.
In addition to mental health impacts, victims have reported losing trust in classmates who targeted them and wanting to switch schools to avoid further contact with harassers. Others stopped posting photos online and remained fearful that the harmful AI images will resurface.
Minors targeting classmates may not realize exactly how far images can potentially spread when generating fake child sex abuse materials (CSAM); they could even end up on the dark web. An investigation by the United Kingdom-based Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) last year reported that “20,254 AI-generated images were found to have been posted to one dark web CSAM forum in a one-month period,” with more than half determined most likely to be criminal.
IWF warned that it has identified a growing market for AI-generated CSAM and concluded that “most AI CSAM found is now realistic enough to be treated as ‘real’ CSAM.” One “shocked” mother of a female classmate victimized in Spain agreed. She told The Guardian that “if I didn’t know my daughter’s body, I would have thought that image was real.”
More drastic steps to stop deepfakes
While lawmakers struggle to apply existing protections against CSAM to AI-generated images or to update laws to explicitly prosecute the offense, other more drastic solutions to prevent the harmful spread of deepfakes have been proposed.
In an op-ed for The Guardian today, journalist Lucia Osborne-Crowley advocated for laws restricting sites used to both generate and surface deepfake pornography, including regulating this harmful content when it appears on social media sites and search engines. And IWF suggested that, like jurisdictions that restrict sharing bomb-making information, lawmakers could also restrict guides instructing bad actors on how to use AI to generate CSAM.
The Malvaluna Association, which represented families of victims in Spain and broadly advocates for better sex education, told El Diario that beyond more regulations, more education is needed to stop teens motivated to use AI to attack classmates. Because the teens were ordered to attend classes, the association agreed to the sentencing measures.
“Beyond this particular trial, these facts should make us reflect on the need to educate people about equality between men and women,” the Malvaluna Association said. The group urged that today’s kids should not be learning about sex through pornography that “generates more sexism and violence.”
Teens sentenced in Spain were between the ages of 13 and 15. According to the Guardian, Spanish law prevented sentencing of minors under 14, but the youth court “can force them to take part in rehabilitation courses.”
Tech companies could also make it easier to report and remove harmful deepfakes. Ars could not immediately reach Meta for comment on efforts to combat the proliferation of AI-generated CSAM on WhatsApp, the private messaging app that was used to share fake images in Spain.
An FAQ said that “WhatsApp has zero tolerance for child sexual exploitation and abuse, and we ban users when we become aware they are sharing content that exploits or endangers children,” but it does not mention AI.
OnlyFans’ paywalls make it hard for police to detect child sexual abuse materials (CSAM) on the platform, Reuters reported—especially new CSAM that can be harder to uncover online.
Because each OnlyFans creator posts their content behind their own paywall, five specialists in online child sexual abuse told Reuters that it’s hard to independently verify just how much CSAM is posted. Cops would seemingly need to subscribe to each account to monitor the entire platform, one expert who aids in police CSAM investigations, Trey Amick, suggested to Reuters.
OnlyFans claims that the amount of CSAM on its platform is extremely low. Out of 3.2 million accounts sharing “hundreds of millions of posts,” OnlyFans only removed 347 posts as suspected CSAM in 2023. Each post was voluntarily reported to the CyberTipline of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), which OnlyFans told Reuters has “full access” to monitor content on the platform.
However, that intensified monitoring seems to have only just begun. NCMEC just got access to OnlyFans in late 2023, the child safety group told Reuters. And NCMEC seemingly can’t scan the entire platform at once, telling Reuters that its access was “limited” exclusively “to OnlyFans accounts reported to its CyberTipline or connected to a missing child case.”
Similarly, OnlyFans told Reuters that police do not have to subscribe to investigate a creator’s posts, but the platform only grants free access to accounts when there’s an active investigation. That means once police suspect that CSAM is being exchanged on an account, they get “full access” to review “account details, content, and direct messages,” Reuters reported.
But that access doesn’t aid police hoping to uncover CSAM shared on accounts not yet flagged for investigation. That’s a problem, a Reuters investigation found, because it’s easy for creators to make a new account, where bad actors can mask their identities to avoid OnlyFans’ “controls meant to hold account holders responsible for their own content,” one detective, Edward Scoggins, told Reuters.
Evading OnlyFans’ CSAM detection seems easy
OnlyFans told Reuters that “would-be creators must provide at least nine pieces of personally identifying information and documents, including bank details, a selfie while holding a government photo ID, and—in the United States—a Social Security number.”
“All this is verified by human judgment and age-estimation technology that analyzes the selfie,” OnlyFans told Reuters. On OnlyFans’ site, the platform further explained that “we continuously scan our platform to prevent the posting of CSAM. All our content moderators are trained to identify and swiftly report any suspected CSAM.”
However, Reuters found that none of these controls worked 100 percent of the time to stop bad actors from sharing CSAM. And the same seemingly holds true for some minors motivated to post their own explicit content. One girl told Reuters that she evaded age verification first by using an adult’s driver’s license to sign up, then by taking over an account of an adult user.
An OnlyFans spokesperson told Ars that low amounts of CSAM reported to NCMEC is a “testament to the rigorous safety controls OnlyFans has in place.”
“OnlyFans is proud of the work we do to aggressively target, report, and support the investigations and prosecutions of anyone who seeks to abuse our platform in this way,” OnlyFans’ spokesperson told Ars. “Unlike many other platforms, the lack of anonymity and absence of end-to-end encryption on OnlyFans means that reports are actionable by law enforcement and prosecutors.”
A judge has dismissed a complaint from a parent and guardian of a girl, now 15, who was sexually assaulted when she was 12 years old after Snapchat recommended that she connect with convicted sex offenders.
According to the court filing, the abuse that the girl, C.O., experienced on Snapchat happened soon after she signed up for the app in 2019. Through its “Quick Add” feature, Snapchat “directed her” to connect with “a registered sex offender using the profile name JASONMORGAN5660.” After a little more than a week on the app, C.O. was bombarded with inappropriate images and subjected to sextortion and threats before the adult user pressured her to meet up, then raped her. Cops arrested the adult user the next day, resulting in his incarceration, but his Snapchat account remained active for three years despite reports of harassment, the complaint alleged.
Two years later, at 14, C.O. connected with another convicted sex offender on Snapchat, a former police officer who offered to give C.O. a ride to school and then sexually assaulted her. The second offender is also currently incarcerated, the judge’s opinion noted.
The lawsuit painted a picture of Snapchat’s ongoing neglect of minors it knows are being targeted by sexual predators. Prior to C.O.’s attacks, both adult users sent and requested sexually explicit photos, seemingly without the app detecting any child sexual abuse materials exchanged on the platform. C.O. had previously reported other adult accounts sending her photos of male genitals, but Snapchat allegedly “did nothing to block these individuals from sending her inappropriate photographs.”
Among other complaints, C.O.’s lawsuit alleged that Snapchat’s algorithm for its “Quick Add” feature was the problem. It allegedly recklessly works to detect when adult accounts are seeking to connect with young girls and, by design, sends more young girls their way—continually directing sexual predators toward vulnerable targets. Snapchat is allegedly aware of these abuses and, therefore, should be held liable for harm caused to C.O., the lawsuit argued.
Although C.O.’s case raised difficult questions, Judge Barbara Bellis ultimately agreed with Snapchat that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act barred all claims and shielded Snap because “the allegations of this case fall squarely within the ambit of the immunity afforded to” platforms publishing third-party content.
According to Bellis, C.O.’s family had “clearly alleged” that Snap had failed to design its recommendations systems to block young girls from receiving messages from sexual predators. Specifically, Section 230 immunity shields Snap from liability in this case because Bellis considered the messages exchanged to be third-party content. Snapchat designing its recommendation systems to deliver content is a protected activity, Bellis ruled.
Internet law professor Eric Goldman wrote in his blog that Bellis’ “well-drafted and no-nonsense opinion” is “grounded” in precedent. Pointing to an “extremely similar” 2008 case against MySpace—”which reached the same outcome that Section 230 applies to offline sexual abuse following online messaging”—Goldman suggested that “the law has been quite consistent for a long time.”
However, as this case was being decided, a seemingly conflicting ruling in a Los Angeles court found that “Section 230 didn’t protect Snapchat from liability for allegedly connecting teens with drug dealers,” MediaPost noted. Bellis acknowledged this outlier opinion but did not appear to consider it persuasive.
Yet, at the end of her opinion, Bellis seemed to take aim at Section 230 as perhaps being too broad.
She quoted a ruling from the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which noted that some Section 230 cases, presumably like C.O.’s, are “hard” for courts not because “the legal issues defy resolution,” but because Section 230 requires that the court “deny relief to plaintiffs whose circumstances evoke outrage.” She then went on to quote an appellate court ruling on a similarly “difficult” Section 230 case that warned “without further legislative action,” there is “little” that courts can do “but join with other courts and commentators in expressing concern” with Section 230’s “broad scope.”
Ars could not immediately reach Snapchat or lawyers representing C.O.’s family for comment.
Law enforcement is continuing to warn that a “flood” of AI-generated fake child sex images is making it harder to investigate real crimes against abused children, The New York Times reported.
Last year, after researchers uncovered thousands of realistic but fake AI child sex images online, quickly every attorney general across the US called on Congress to set up a committee to squash the problem. But so far, Congress has moved slowly, while only a few states have specifically banned AI-generated non-consensual intimate imagery. Meanwhile, law enforcement continues to struggle with figuring out how to confront bad actors found to be creating and sharing images that, for now, largely exist in a legal gray zone.
“Creating sexually explicit images of children through the use of artificial intelligence is a particularly heinous form of online exploitation,” Steve Grocki, the chief of the Justice Department’s child exploitation and obscenity section, told The Times. Experts told The Washington Post in 2023 that risks of realistic but fake images spreading included normalizing child sexual exploitation, luring more children into harm’s way, and making it harder for law enforcement to find actual children being harmed.
In one example, the FBI announced earlier this year that an American Airlines flight attendant, Estes Carter Thompson III, was arrested “for allegedly surreptitiously recording or attempting to record a minor female passenger using a lavatory aboard an aircraft.” A search of Thompson’s iCloud revealed “four additional instances” where Thompson allegedly recorded other minors in the lavatory, as well as “over 50 images of a 9-year-old unaccompanied minor” sleeping in her seat. While police attempted to identify these victims, they also “further alleged that hundreds of images of AI-generated child pornography” were found on Thompson’s phone.
The troubling case seems to illustrate how AI-generated child sex images can be linked to real criminal activity while also showing how police investigations could be bogged down by attempts to distinguish photos of real victims from AI images that could depict real or fake children.
Robin Richards, the commander of the Los Angeles Police Department’s Internet Crimes Against Children task force, confirmed to the NYT that due to AI, “investigations are way more challenging.”
And because image generators and AI models that can be trained on photos of children are widely available, “using AI to alter photos” of children online “is becoming more common,” Michael Bourke—a former chief psychologist for the US Marshals Service who spent decades supporting investigations into sex offenses involving children—told the NYT. Richards said that cops don’t know what to do when they find these AI-generated materials.
Currently, there aren’t many cases involving AI-generated child sex abuse materials (CSAM), The NYT reported, but experts expect that number will “grow exponentially,” raising “novel and complex questions of whether existing federal and state laws are adequate to prosecute these crimes.”
Platforms struggle to monitor harmful AI images
At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing today grilling Big Tech CEOs over child sexual exploitation (CSE) on their platforms, Linda Yaccarino—CEO of X (formerly Twitter)—warned in her opening statement that artificial intelligence is also making it harder for platforms to monitor CSE. Yaccarino suggested that industry collaboration is imperative to get ahead of the growing problem, as is providing more resources to law enforcement.
However, US law enforcement officials have indicated that platforms are also making it harder to police CSAM and CSE online. Platforms relying on AI to detect CSAM are generating “unviable reports” gumming up investigations managed by already underfunded law enforcement teams, The Guardian reported. And the NYT reported that other investigations are being thwarted by adding end-to-end encryption options to messaging services, which “drastically limit the number of crimes the authorities are able to track.”
The NYT report noted that in 2002, the Supreme Court struck down a law that had been on the books since 1996 preventing “virtual” or “computer-generated child pornography.” South Carolina’s attorney general, Alan Wilson, has said that AI technology available today may test that ruling, especially if minors continue to be harmed by fake AI child sex images spreading online. In the meantime, federal laws such as obscenity statutes may be used to prosecute cases, the NYT reported.
Congress has recently re-introduced some legislation to directly address AI-generated non-consensual intimate images after a wide range of images depicting fake AI porn of pop star Taylor Swift went viral this month. That includes the Disrupt Explicit Forged Images and Non-Consensual Edits Act, which creates a federal civil remedy for any victims of any age who are identifiable in AI images depicting them as nude or engaged in sexually explicit conduct or sexual scenarios.
There’s also the “Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act,” which seeks to “prohibit the non-consensual disclosure of digitally altered intimate images.” That was re-introduced this year after teen boys generated AI fake nude images of female classmates and spread them around a New Jersey high school last fall. Francesca Mani, one of the teen victims in New Jersey, was there to help announce the proposed law, which includes penalties of up to two years imprisonment for sharing harmful images.
“What happened to me and my classmates was not cool, and there’s no way I’m just going to shrug and let it slide,” Mani said. “I’m here, standing up and shouting for change, fighting for laws, so no one else has to feel as lost and powerless as I did on October 20th.”