> In my personal opinion, when Apple began these scans, they effectively became an agent of the state.
I think reading United States v. Miller (982 F.3D 412) will probably convince you otherwise. Here, the state actor doctrine is defined to include activities that are always the province of the government. While arresting offenders and prosecuting them is definitely in this zone, scanning hashes and comparing them to a list - even one provided by NCMEC/the government - is not. In Miller, the court says, “Only when a party has been ‘endowed with law enforcement powers beyond those enjoyed by’ everyone else have courts treated the party’s actions as government actions.”
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s a terrible product decision to violate the user’s privacy like this, especially in this golden age of the state’s ability to surveillance. But it is certainly not state action.
I think reading United States v. Miller (982 F.3D 412) will probably convince you otherwise. Here, the state actor doctrine is defined to include activities that are always the province of the government. While arresting offenders and prosecuting them is definitely in this zone, scanning hashes and comparing them to a list - even one provided by NCMEC/the government - is not. In Miller, the court says, “Only when a party has been ‘endowed with law enforcement powers beyond those enjoyed by’ everyone else have courts treated the party’s actions as government actions.”
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s a terrible product decision to violate the user’s privacy like this, especially in this golden age of the state’s ability to surveillance. But it is certainly not state action.