Durov’s Arrest Details Released, Leaving More Questions Than Answers

Mike Masnick · 26 Aug 2024

Mike Masnick did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

Our reading
The encryption-licensing charges against Durov are pretextual, a legal hook for prosecuting things France dislikes about Telegram.

Their wordsBut, here, it’s hard not to see that as totally pretextual: an excuse to arrest Durov over other stuff they don’t like him doing.
Our reading
Most of what Durov is charged with is conduct almost any large platform could be accused of.

Their wordsA lot of the things listed in the charge sheet are things that lots of websites and communications providers could be said to have done themselves, though perhaps to a different degree.
Our reading
Telegram reports no child sexual abuse material at all to the clearing house that handles it, and that is indefensible even if no law compels a non-US company to.

Their wordsI know from the report that Stanford put out earlier this year that Telegram does not report CSAM to NCMEC at all. That is very stupid. I would imagine Telegram would argue that as a non-US company it doesn’t have to abide by such laws.
Our reading
Complicity is a dangerous legal standard for platforms, because every platform hosts some illegal material and stopping it entirely is impossible.

Their wordsThe list of “complicity” in various bad things worries me because every platform has some element of that kind of content going on, in part because it’s impossible to stop entirely.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.