By: Ot Van Daalen (European Law Blog)
On 11 May, the European Commission published its proposal for a regulation to combat child sexual abuse material (CSAM). The Commission managed to squeeze a host of controversial digital rights issues into one package: the blocking of websites, the obligatory monitoring of online content, and, the most novel one, a measure which opens the door to undermining encryption.
Because encryption technologies protect communications confidentiality, one crucial question in the upcoming policy debate will be whether this latter measure, or its implementation, is compatible with the rights of privacy and data protection under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (the Charter). In this contribution, I explore one aspect of that question: is it possible to argue that this measure does not respect the essence of these rights? On the basis of a preliminary analysis, I conclude that this is certainly defensible and suggest further routes for exploration.
The proposal obliges chat providers to detect illegal material and illegal behaviour
But first – what is the measure exactly? The entire Commission proposal is extensive, with 89 Articles, spanning over 130 pages. But the measure in question can be summarised in one sentence: under the proposal, a national authority would be granted the power to request an independent body (such as a court) to issue a “detection order” against a provider of “interpersonal communications services” to take measures to detect “online sexual child abuse”, which includes both distribution of CSAM and soliciting of children (Art. 2(p).)
To give effect to the order, providers must install and operate technologies which perform such detection, and must report matches to a designated authority. These “interpersonal communications services” are services which enable online, “direct interpersonal and interactive exchange of information” (see Art. 2(b) proposal jo. Art. 2(5) Electronic Communications Code). Importantly, this includes popular chat services in the EU, such as WhatsApp, iMessenger, Telegram and Signal, all of which are end-to-end encrypted (something I’ll get to later)…
Featured News
Motorola Accuses UK of Antitrust Breach Over Terminated Emergency Services Contract
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Amazon Must Face Antitrust Case Over Alleged Monopoly Practices
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
US Appeals Court Blocks FCC’s Move to Reinstate Net Neutrality Rules
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Nvidia’s $700 Million Buyout of Run:ai Gets EU Approval, Deal Finalized
Jan 1, 2025 by
CPI
Taiwan FTC Halts Uber’s $950M Foodpanda Buyout Over Antitrust Fears
Jan 1, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand