Comment by rdm_blackhole

> You're reading too much into this

OP is not reading too much into this. You are being naive if you think that this is not the intended goal of this law.

Everyone who has looked at this proposal know that the 'changes" made to the latest draft are not real changes and that voluntary scanning with repercussions is the same exact thing as mandatory.

If a robber walks into your house and ask you to give all your cash and threatens to break your legs if you don't do it, did you give your money voluntarily or was it forced by the threat of violence?

Either something is mandatory and if not done, should be punished accordingly or something is voluntary in which case, then if someone does not do it there are no repercussions.

You can't say that something is voluntary and but that there would be repercussions if that thing is not done. It does not make sense.

Yet that is exactly what this law says. High risk companies should prevent the spread of CSAM but they are not forced to do it, except that if they don't do it then bad things will happen to them but don't worry it's not mandatory.

Those are just weasel words by politicians. Nothing more.