Founder of telegram arrested in france

[edGfaCTor]

If you know that user has say sent illegal imagery to another user then there is your probable cause. You now should be able to gain access to everything that platform has on that user, their IP etc. Or that person has been in contact with a known terrorist that is suspected of planning an attack, that would likely be enough in many jurisdictions to gain a warrant.

It seems with this guy that he refuses to moderate any content and not work with authorities if they want details on certain users. I'm not suggesting authorities should be able to read content at will but with an court authorised warrent.

It's not what you know but what you can prove that is the law.

If you have prove you get the warrant but these people wnt access without that.

It's not for communications platforms to moderate if you do it for this platform then all of them should have it including people mobile calls and landlines.

People really should not want the state controlling everything look at other countries which are not a good thing is it.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

It's not what you know but what you can prove that is the law.

If you have prove you get the warrant but these people wnt access without that.

It's not for communications platforms to moderate if you do it for this platform then all of them should have it including people mobile calls and landlines.

People really should not want the state controlling everything look at other countries which are not a good thing is it.

Telegram are resisting helping law enforcement in any way regardless of what proof they and the courts produce. Mobile companies and ISPs can't do that so why should Telegram. You want these companies to operate beyond the law?

 

[PlacidCasual]

Telegram are resisting helping law enforcement in any way regardless of what proof they and the courts produce. Mobile companies and ISPs can't do that so why should Telegram. You want these companies to operate beyond the law?

In some countries operating beyond the law is allowing democratic movements to spread actual truth and facts, maybe Iran or Russia for instance. If Telegram has taken a blanket approach that they will enforce privacy this protects the good in bad places just as much as it protects the bad in good places. We see Telegram being used heavily In Ukraine and Russia on both sides of political/conflict divide. Pro-Russia bloggers and Russian pro-democracy movements as well as Ukrainian armed forces. I think the solution to criminal content issues might be on device AI type controls not through the service.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

In some countries operating beyond the law is allowing democratic movements to spread actual truth and facts, maybe Iran or Russia for instance. If Telegram has taken a blanket approach that they will enforce privacy this protects the good in bad places just as much as it protects the bad in good places. We see Telegram being used heavily In Ukraine and Russia on both sides of political/conflict divide. Pro-Russia bloggers and Russian pro-democracy movements as well as Ukrainian armed forces. I think the solution to criminal content issues might be on device AI type controls not through the service.

We aren't Iran, Russia or China. I don't like the idea that a company thinks its above the law in the UK, USA etc. We are a sovereign nation with a democratically elected government. Telegram is a private company and I fail to see why it should be allowed to operate beyond our laws. I'm not suggesting shutting it down, I'm saying they should have to follow the rules all these other companies do. Do you really want a bunch of tech oligarchs deciding these things rather than elected governments?

 

[Richie]

We aren't Iran, Russia or China. I don't like the idea that a company thinks its above the law in the UK, USA etc. We are a sovereign nation with a democratically elected government. Telegram is a private company and I fail to see why it should be allowed to operate beyond our laws. I'm not suggesting shutting it down, I'm saying they should have to follow the rules all these other companies do. Do you really want a bunch of tech oligarchs deciding these things rather than elected governments?

The problem you have is different countries have different laws... Step back from the CSAM thing which is worldwide. If a country decided that its unlawful for any porn to be shown on these platforms, porn that is legal in other countries to show, should Telegram blanket ban it all and report? How does the platform decide to only enact some laws in some countries where things are illegal when the location of the device can be spoofed. Should the platform then be liable?

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

The problem you have is different countries have different laws... Step back from the CSAM thing which is worldwide. If a country decided that its unlawful for any porn to be shown on these platforms, porn that is legal in other countries to show, should Telegram blanket ban it all and report? How does the platform decide to only enact some laws in some countries where things are illegal when the location of the device can be spoofed. Should the platform then be liable?

That isn't what the issue is here. Telegram is refusing to work with authorities on anything, CSAM, money laundering, drugs, weapons. I'm sure some countries will ban Telegram, that is their right, like they ban other platforms. You are making a case for all the platforms to allow any content, refuse to remove it and refuse to work with law enforcement.

 

[Richie]

You are making a case for all the platforms to allow any content, refuse to remove it and refuse to work with law enforcement.

I'm really not... It was a response to your "I don't like the idea that a company thinks its above the law in the UK, USA etc. ".... I was considering how a company is "above the law" when the laws are different in different countries and companies are global and active in various countries.

It was meant as a point of discussion, not an opinion.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

I'm really not... It was a response to your "I don't like the idea that a company thinks its above the law in the UK, USA etc. ".... I was considering how a company is "above the law" when the laws are different in different countries and companies are global and active in various countries.

It was meant as a point of discussion, not an opinion.

If they want to operate in that country they comply with its laws. Why should they get a pass no other company does? Twitter, Google and Meta have to comply with local laws, Telegram isn't special.

 

[Murphy]

Unless you intend each country to have an intranet or firewall companies don't have much choice when it comes to operating in a country, the internet doesn't care about borders or where people are from.

 

[dowie]

Unless you intend each country to have an intranet or firewall companies don't have much choice when it comes to operating in a country, the internet doesn't care about borders or where people are from.

The internet is a network of computers, it's not capable of caring in the first place!

Governments do however care if you break their laws - try publicly setting up a gambling company offering services to Americans without a license and see what happens if travel to the US at any point in the future.

Countries don't need firewalls just because they have laws covering what is and isn't allowed online, they can of course block particularly malicious sites but they can also go after the people and organisational running such sites.

 

[dowie]

If a country decided that its unlawful for any porn to be shown on these platforms, porn that is legal in other countries to show, should Telegram blanket ban it all and report? How does the platform decide to only enact some laws in some countries where things are illegal when the location of the device can be spoofed.

Block that location, if someone accessing material from a VPN elsewhere then that's not telegram serving up material in that country but rather in the country the VPN is in.

IIRC there was mention in some reporting that they remove channels from the mobile app when needed to comply with Apple regulations, no reason why they can't do that for countries.