Apple seeks dismissal of iCloud child sex abuse material class action

Update: 

• Apple asked a California federal judge to throw out a class action lawsuit claiming the company overlooked child sexual abuse material uploads to its iCloud service.
• The tech giant argues the claims are barred under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. 
• While calling child sexual abuse content “abhorrent,” Apple said it satisfies all three prongs of the law needed to qualify for immunity under Section 230, which often  protects internet service providers from being liable for content posted on their platforms by third parties. 
• The Apple iCloud class action argues Apple failed to adopt industry standards that could detect and prevent child sexual abuse material from being uploaded to its iCloud service. 
• The class action also accuses Apple of so-called “privacy washing” by allegedly touting a commitment to protect consumer privacy while at the same time failing to implement its stated privacy protection ideas. 

Apple class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: A Jane Doe minor filed a class action lawsuit through her guardian against Apple Inc. 
• Why: Doe claims Apple overlooks the upload of child sexual abuse material to its iCloud service by allegedly failing to “adopt industry standards” for detecting it. 
• Where: The Apple class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court. 

(August 22, 2024)

Apple Inc. overlooks the upload of child sexual abuse material to its iCloud service, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

A minor Jane Doe’s class action lawsuit claims Apple engages in so-called “privacy washing” by allegedly touting a commitment to protect its customers privacy while simultaneously neglecting to “meaningfully implement” its stated privacy protection ideas to practice. 

“A clear example of privacy-washing is this case,” the Apple class action says. “According to the statements of its anti-fraud chief, Apple knew that iCloud has become ‘the greatest platform for distributing child porn.’”

Doe, who filed the complaint by and through her guardian, wants to represent a nationwide class of individuals who has been a victim of child sexual abuse within the past three years as a result of the transmission of child sexual abuse material on Apple’s iCloud service.

Apple chooses not to adopt industry standards for detecting child sexual abuse material, class action claims

Doe argues Apple opts not to “adopt industry standards” for detecting child sexual abuse material and, instead, “shifts the burden and cost of creating a safe user experience to children and their families.” 

“Apple’s privacy policy states that it would collect users’ private information to prevent things like (child sexual abuse material), but it fails to do so in practice – a failure that it already knew of,” the Apple class action says. 

Doe claims Apple is guilty of misrepresentation and unjust enrichment, among other things, and of violating federal sex trafficking laws, a pair of California business and professional codes and North Carolina consumer protection laws. 

The plaintiff demands a jury trial and requests declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of compensatory and punitive damages for herself and all class members. 

A pair of antitrust class action lawsuits were filed against Apple earlier this year over claims the company monopolized the smartphone market with its iPhone and engaged in anticompetitive practices. 

Have you been a victim of child sexual abuse as a result of child sexual abuse material being uploaded to iCloud? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Juyoun Han and Eric Baum of Eisenberg & Baum LLP and John K. Buche and Byron Ma of The Buche Law Firm PC.

The Apple class action lawsuit is Doe, et al. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 5:24-cv-05107, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Apple pays women less than male counterparts, class action claims
• Apple, Amazon class actions claim companies failed to pay background actors accurate wages
• Two iPhone antitrust class actions accuse Apple of anticompetitive practices
• Recent Apple lawsuits focus on company’s alleged monopolistic actions