The Register: Elon Musk’s X mashed by Australian court for evading child protection reporting

Source URL: https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/04/x_loses_australian_child_safety_case/
Source: The Register
Title: Elon Musk’s X mashed by Australian court for evading child protection reporting

Feedly Summary: Argument that it didn’t inherit Twitter’s legal obligations did not hit the spot
Australia’s Federal Court has rejected Elon Musk’s assertion that X/Twitter does not need to comply with local requirements to provide information about how it detects, removes and prevents the spread of child sexual abuse material.…

AI Summary and Description: Yes

Summary: The Federal Court of Australia has ruled against X Corp (formerly Twitter) in a case regarding compliance with local online safety regulations, emphasizing that acquisition does not exempt companies from existing regulatory obligations. This decision has implications for international compliance and privacy expectations for online platforms.

Detailed Description: This recent ruling from Australia’s Federal Court centers on the obligation of social media platforms to comply with local regulations aimed at ensuring user safety, particularly concerning child exploitation content. Here are the key points of the case:

– **Background**: The eSafety Commissioner of Australia issued reporting notices to major platforms including Twitter (now X Corp), requiring details on measures taken to combat child sexual exploitation online.
– **Compliance Issue**: X Corp, under Elon Musk’s ownership, contended that it was not bound by the implications of the notice because it was issued to Twitter prior to the acquisition.
– **Court’s Ruling**: The judge determined that statutory obligations do transfer to a successor entity under US law, thereby reinforcing the legal continuity of regulatory responsibilities after a merger or acquisition.
– **Result**: The court has imposed a civil penalty of AUD$615,000 (approximately $420,000) on X Corp for its failure to comply adequately with the eSafety Commissioner’s request.
– **Regulatory Implications**: The eSafety Commissioner expressed that accepting X Corp’s argument could have established a troubling precedent, potentially allowing foreign companies to evade compliance with Australian regulations by restructuring.

This ruling highlights the importance of understanding cross-jurisdictional regulatory obligations, especially for companies operating internationally in the tech space. Compliance professionals need to be aware of such developments as they emphasize the commitment to child protection standards and accountability for digital platforms worldwide. Furthermore, this case emphasizes the risks of non-compliance and the potential legal ramifications of operational changes, which remain critical areas for organizations focused on maintaining robust security and privacy frameworks.