Is there any website owner with a million users who can't be held accountable for the same crimes? According to the logic in France, since criminals use Windows, the CEO of Microsoft could also be blamed.
What a superficial take. Following the same logic, highway management would be held accountable if a killer used one of their roads to go and commit a crime.
But for platform providers, they (the providers) have the responsibility to moderate the content that is hosted publicly on their platforms. Which most of the content on Telegram is. And if some illegal material is there, they (the providers) have the responsibility to take it offline.
Do you have any idea how much, let's say Meta, spends in terms of money and manpower to prevent this? How much moderation goes on for most of the platforms? Read about regulations in France (SREN law IIRC).
"Telegram has played a role in multiple criminal cases in France tied to child sexual abuse, drug trafficking and online hate crimes, but has shown a “near-total absence” of response to requests for cooperation from law enforcement, Ms. Beccuau said."
That's a very bad take. The charges are because of Telegram repeatedly refusing or being too slow to take down illegal content (illegal in France, that is): child pornography, drugs ads, etc. Meta and X both remove illegal content when a notice from authorities is made, unlike Telegram which drags its feet.
If Telegram was encrypted e2e, Durov would not have been able to know of the existence of that illegal content, and could have plausible deniability. As it stands though, Telegram was notified of publicly available illegal content, and refused to remove it, which is a crime in France, where Durov is a citizen.
Why is this important? Do you think he would not have been arrested if he had not had a French passport? I would think that all that matters is that his crimes fall under French jurisdiction.
I agree, I don't like double standards
> why when elon musk seized it he could bring down pedopornography by double digit percentage in a few weeks?
I am not sure if I got this right. I was under the impression that illegal and extreme content and bots on twitter only grew as Elon seized it. He fired a majority of his moderation staff, right?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-07/elon-musk...
They all cooperate with governments: https://www.engadget.com/authorities-reportedly-ordered-goog...
In fact, google is partly CIA/NSA
https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-ci...
Or that the charges are false?
Or that the charges are true but only enforced because they want him for other reasons?
Go and look at "Safe Harbour" rules. Its not a blank cheque to say "oh it wasn't us, it was the users". your protection from being sanctioned is contingent on complying with requests to take down posts(be that copyright or other).
The same thing applies here