eSafety Takes Telegram to Federal Court over Pro-Terror Material

• eSafety has initiated civil penalty proceedings against Telegram for allegedly failing to remove pro-terror material from its platform.
• The action follows a year-long investigation by eSafety, which found that Telegram breached the Online Safety Act 2021's Relevant Electronic Services Standard.
• Telegram faces a maximum civil penalty of $54.6 million if found guilty of noncompliance with online safety obligations.

eSafety has initiated civil penalty proceedings against Telegram for allegedly failing to identify and remove pro-terror material from its platform. The action follows a year-long investigation by eSafety, which found that Telegram breached the Online Safety Act 2021's Relevant Electronic Services Standard. Specifically, Telegram was noncompliant in areas related to limiting, identifying, deterring, and disrupting the distribution of unlawful material. This is not an isolated incident, as eSafety had previously issued a transparency reporting notice to Telegram in March 2024, which mandated the platform to respond to questions about its compliance with basic online safety expectations.

The Online Safety Act 2021 imposes significant obligations on digital platforms to protect users from hosting, sharing, amplifying, or monetizing harmful material. Section 146(1) of the Act stipulates that online services must take steps to limit and deter the distribution of unlawful content. Failure to comply with these obligations can result in a maximum civil penalty of $54.6 million. This case sets a precedent for digital platforms' responsibilities under the Online Safety Act, highlighting the importance of meeting systemic safety obligations.

This case has significant implications for lawyers and compliance officers advising clients on their online presence. The court's decision will establish a clear precedent for digital platforms' obligations to protect users from hosting or sharing harmful material. As eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant noted, 'No platform is above the law,' emphasizing that digital platforms must meet their responsibilities to prevent the dissemination of unlawful content.

Lawyers and compliance officers should be aware that this case sets a precedent for digital platforms' obligations to protect users from hosting, sharing, amplifying, or monetizing harmful material under the Online Safety Act 2021. They may need to advise clients on their own responsibilities in meeting these obligations.

Source: Original reporting via Australasian Lawyer