A United States judge has dismissed a proposed class action lawsuit accusing Apple of failing to prevent the storage and sharing of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on its iCloud platform, ruling that the technology giant is protected under a federal law that shields online service providers from liability for content posted by users.
In a ruling issued late on Monday, US District Judge Noël Wise of the District Court in San Jose, California, agreed with Apple’s argument that the claims fall within the protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that generally exempts online platforms from liability for user-generated content.
The lawsuit, filed in 2024 by two plaintiffs identified only by the pseudonyms Amy and Jessica, alleged that images documenting their childhood sexual abuse continued to be stored and shared through Apple’s iCloud service. They sought to represent a class of approximately 2,680 individuals with similar claims.
According to court filings, the plaintiffs estimated compensatory damages of up to US$32.8 billion and also sought a court order compelling Apple to introduce changes to its iCloud platform to better detect and prevent the circulation of child sexual abuse material.
Judge Wise ruled that the case attempted to hold Apple liable for failing to remove or block content created and uploaded by users, placing the claims squarely within the scope of Section 230.
In her decision, Wise stated that no existing federal law requires Apple to proactively deploy available technologies—or develop new ones—to identify and report child sexual abuse material stored on its cloud platform.
”Lawmakers can fix this problem that is contributing to the exploitation of children,” Wise wrote. “This Court cannot.”
The judge dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs cannot file the same claims again in the same court.
The ruling comes amid growing legal scrutiny of Section 230, with courts across the United States increasingly considering cases that argue technology companies should be held accountable for harms arising from the design of their products rather than solely from user-generated content.
James Marsh, the attorney representing the plaintiffs, said his clients are considering an appeal and are assessing whether other legal avenues remain available.
Although the plaintiffs disagree with the court’s interpretation of the law, Marsh said they shared the judge’s view that stronger legislative action is needed.
”We agree with her conclusion that Congress should do more to protect children online and address the skyrocketing harms from online exploitation,” he said.
Apple did not immediately respond to requests for comment following the ruling.
The lawsuit alleged that Apple had long been aware of the presence of child sexual abuse material on iCloud but failed to adopt widely available technologies capable of detecting and reporting such content.
It also pointed to Apple’s abandoned NeuralHash initiative. In 2021, the company announced plans to introduce the system to identify known child sexual abuse material. However, the programme was shelved the following year after concerns were raised about privacy and security. Around the same period, Apple expanded end-to-end encryption for iCloud data, a move the plaintiffs argued made it significantly more difficult for both Apple and law enforcement agencies to detect illegal content.
Apple has consistently maintained that it is committed to combating the spread of child sexual abuse material while protecting users’ privacy. In court filings, the company said it decided against implementing NeuralHash because of potential risks to users’ security and instead adopted alternative measures to tackle the issue.
Judge Wise had previously dismissed an earlier version of the complaint but allowed the plaintiffs to amend their claims before ultimately dismissing the case permanently.
Apple also continues to face a separate lawsuit brought by the Attorney General of West Virginia, who has described the case as the first government-led legal challenge over the alleged distribution of child sexual abuse material through Apple’s cloud storage platform.
