[kmeisthax]

The owner is currently being sued by a woman who used the site as a minor and was matched with a pedophile who convinced her to make and send CSAM. This isn't the usual kind of "CSAM intermediary liablility" lawsuit; the plaintiff is actually making an ordinary product liability claim. i.e. Omegle has no safety bars to keep kids from using the service ergo they are liable for me being abused by an adult.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64618791

[zug_zug]

That seems nuts to me. It's just a generic venue for people meeting people, like a cafe that happens to be online.

To me that makes as much sense as suing a cafe because you met somebody there who talked you into illegal activities.

[op00to]

No cafe would allow an adult to sexually groom a child while sitting at a table.

[zug_zug]

Yes, 90% of cafes would, because just like Omegle, it's not their job or ability to monitor every single interaction between every single person and identify whether a conversation is appropriate.

Crimes happen on all technologies and in all venues, and they likely always will.

[fer]

No grooming happened on Omegle, she just shared her personal info there and kept in touch off the platform.

[nullc]

By their own case the explicit activity didn't even take place on omegle. The perv met the kid and went elsewhere. Of course that wouldn't be prevented in a cafe.

[gosub100]

No parent would allow their child to communicate with a groomer.

[cosmojg]

Well, her parents clearly did.

[oynqr]

So they sue the platform that got them to meet, but not the one that allowed CSAM to be exchanged?

[s1artibartfast]

correct, like suing the city because you met a podophile in the city park

[goydefense]

The decentralized cryptonet can't come fast enough!