Microsoft, Google on Thursday informed the Delhi High Court that currently they don’t have the technology to automatically detect and remove non-consensual intimate images (NCII) without specific URLs.
“AI [Artificial Intelligence] has not yet reached the level to figure out consent,” the tech giants said, while challenging an order passed by a Single Judge Bench of the High Court in April last year.
The Single Judge had then said that since the social media intermediary entities already possessed tools for prevention of child pornography, it can be deployed to reduce NCII abuse.
Microsoft has developed a software — Photo DNA — which is currently being used to identify CSAM and is also being used by platforms such as Google and Twitter. YouTube has also developed CSAI (Child Sexual Abuse Imagery) Match which is used by NGOs and other companies to identify against the database of known abusive content.
The Single Judge had cautioned social media intermediaries that they risk losing their liability protection if they fail to adhere precisely to the time frame outlined in the Information Technology Rules (IT Rules) for removing NCII.
‘Problem area’
On Thursday, counsel for the tech giants told the court that, “It’s possible that in a year’s time, may be a year-and-half, AI reaches that level, but to saddle me now and say I will lose my immunity, that’s the problem area.”
The counsel stated that for Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), the technology already exists but not for ‘non-consensual sexually explicit images’.
While CSAM is clearly and universally illegal, NCII content’s legality hinges on the context in which it is captured or shared, Google had previously told the court. It had stated that despite diligent efforts to prevent its reappearance, such content can often be easily altered, thereby circumventing detection.
The counsel for the tech giants told the court that any individual seeking to remove NCII content only requires the user to tag that image and URL. “You don’t even need to come to court to remove content of that nature. People just need to follow some steps,” the counsel said.
A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said, “According to you, unless and until the URL is given, it cannot be done. But, as soon as it is hosted on the URL, the damage is already done”.
“Therefore, the problem is this, you [court] are passing an injunction order, but it is not getting implemented because the URL keeps changing,” the Bench said.
The tech giants, however, emphasised that the technology is being developed, however, “it is not perfect as of today”.
“If there is a difference in a pixelation, to the human eye it is the same, but to the computer resource, which is not in any way touched by human intervention, it will not appear to the same image,” the counsel for the tech giants said.
Noting that the Single Judge issued directions and recommendations requiring search engines to adopt measures beyond their current capabilities, the court told the tech giants to go back to the Single Judge with a review petition to recall his order.
