EU Softens CSAM Rules for Big Tech: What Governments Should Do Next
EU member states reached an agreement on Nov. 26 to address child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on major platforms. The deal recommends that companies like Google and Meta identify child exploitation content, assess risks, and take preventive steps. Enforcement will sit with national governments rather than Brussels. Reuters called it "a victory for U.S. companies."
Why this is seen as a win for U.S. firms
Early drafts required platforms to legally identify, report, and delete abusive content. Those mandatory provisions were stripped out. Deletion is now discretionary, which shifts the burden back to voluntary compliance and national interpretation. For companies, that's less legal exposure and more room to set their own controls.
Signals of a wider regulatory pullback
- Antitrust in France: The French search engine Qwant accused Microsoft of self-preferencing and ad allocation tactics that blocked market entry. France's competition authority dismissed the case on Nov. 27, citing a lack of credible evidence.
- AI Act delay in the EU: Enforcement for "high-risk" AI systems-covering data, explainability, and risk management-was pushed back from August 2026 to 2027. This gives both regulators and industry more time, but it also slows guardrail deployment.
- U.S. federal-state tension: The administration pressed states to pause their own AI rules and argued for a single federal standard. A move to tie federal funding (including broadband subsidies) to deregulatory compliance was blocked by Congress. The July "AI Action Plan" prioritizes national AI leadership and development over new restrictions.
Lobbying is shaping the field
Big tech's presence in policy circles is large and growing. Axios reports that in Q2, Meta spent $5.8 million on lobbying, Amazon $4.5 million, and Google $3.2 million. With AI now central to economic strategy, lawmakers are hearing more from platforms and well-funded startups. Expect more pressure to keep obligations "risk-based" and flexible.
Reuters: Technology coverage
European Commission: AI Act overview
What this means for government teams
With EU rules softened and U.S. federal preemption on the table, the center of gravity moves to national and subnational action. You'll need clarity on what "identify, assess, and prevent" actually requires in practice. Voluntary frameworks help, but without enforcement plans and metrics, abuse content will slip through the cracks.
For EU member states
- Define minimum expectations: Issue national guidance on CSAM detection standards, reporting timelines, and incident thresholds. Set baselines even if EU obligations are light.
- Tie compliance to transparency: Require periodic public reports: detection methods, false-positive rates, content removal timelines, and escalation paths to law enforcement.
- Use audits, not just notices: Stand up independent technical audits for high-reach platforms. Focus on detection efficacy and risk controls, not just policy paperwork.
- Create safe channels for data: Establish lawful mechanisms to share hashes and signals with recognized hotlines and law enforcement while protecting privacy.
- Coordinate regionally: Align with neighbors on evidence standards and mutual assistance to avoid enforcement gaps.
For U.S. federal and state officials
- If pursuing a single standard: Spell out core protections (age verification, detection benchmarks, reporting windows) and preemption limits. Avoid blank-check preemption.
- Guard against funding leverage: Keep critical infrastructure funds insulated from policy fights so agencies aren't forced into weak oversight.
- Procurement as leverage: Bake CSAM and AI-risk criteria into contracts for cloud, ads, and platform services. Vendors respond to clear buying standards.
For competition and consumer authorities
- Evidence playbook: Publish what constitutes "credible evidence" for self-preferencing and foreclosure claims to avoid dismissals on technicalities.
- Interoperability remedies: When feasible, consider conduct remedies that open up ad markets and discovery pathways without years of litigation.
- Watch for AI-enabled lock-in: Track how model access, default placements, and ad tools can entrench incumbents.
Implementation checklist (practical, 90-day window)
- Week 1-2: Map platforms by risk: user base, minors' exposure, encrypted services, and known CSAM vectors. Assign lead agency and escalation contacts.
- Week 3-4: Issue draft guidance on detection, reporting, and transparency. Invite technical comments from platforms, hotlines, and NGOs.
- Week 5-8: Pilot audit protocols with two high-reach services. Test data-sharing and due process safeguards.
- Week 9-12: Finalize guidance, launch a reporting dashboard, and set quarterly review dates. Publish noncompliance consequences.
Metrics that matter
- Detection quality: Rate of confirmed CSAM vs. false positives, time-to-removal, and repeat-offender suppression.
- User safety signals: Reports from minors, response times, and re-victimization indicators.
- Platform accountability: Completeness of transparency reports, audit remediation speed, and cooperation with cross-border requests.
Bottom line
Rules are softening, but the public risk isn't. If national authorities set clear baselines, require transparency, and back it with audits and procurement levers, they can keep pressure on platforms without waiting years for new statutes. Act now, measure publicly, and close the gaps that let abuse persist.
Building AI oversight skills? See courses by job
Your membership also unlocks:
