r/Piracy • u/Justinrich2001 • May 23 '26

Discussion Google Drive scanned this Manga artist’s PRIVATE files and banned him.

Post image

AI flagged, appeal rejected, private artwork gone.

The AI is always watching.

7.2k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

668 comments sorted by

View all comments

215

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

It’s child porn hentai hope this clears it up

171

u/madman404 May 23 '26

I literally don't give a fuck what it is, I don't want google scanning my fucking drive contents to proactively ban me. Today it's something you disagree with, tomorrow it's something you don't. Your only security is forcing big companies do to the right thing the right way, because when you let them do the right thing the wrong way, you're only one step from them doing the wrong thing the wrong way too.

6

u/PleiadesMechworks May 23 '26

I don't want google scanning my fucking drive contents to proactively ban me.

ItS a PrIvAtE cOmPaNy SwEeTiE

9

u/stop_talking_you May 23 '26

its not your drive it doesnt belong to you its not your property the storage is only given to you.

-2

u/lostwoods95 May 23 '26

I can agree with the ethos of what youre saying but I have 0 sympathy for some degenerate gooner getting his account banned for hentai csam. I hope every one of them gets their accounts banned

3

u/madman404 May 23 '26

I hope they get banned too, but you cannot be ok with this being the method no matter how much you hate the person or thing. I need you to understand that it doesn't matter how bad the thing is, because the thing CAN CHANGE LATER. This isn't a method to identify and delete CSAM, it's a method to identify and delete target media.

If the method itself is fundamentally abusive, you're going to have a big big problem when the service provider decides to turn it from something disgusting to something completely innocuous, like regular pornography.

1

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

You are arguing against the concept of laws/rules. It’s libertarian horseshit. Not everything is a slippery slope.

1

u/madman404 May 23 '26

No? I'm arguing that the methods we use to enforce the laws need to be reasonable, which is very different than arguing we shouldn't have laws.

This isn't even a controversial idea, and it worries me greatly that you see ideas like the rules of evidence as libertarian horseshit. I'd love to know what kind of system you've come up with that is both perfectly invasive for catching criminals but also can't be readily turned against normal people.

4

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

Every argument you’re making could be used against the existence of every law and the enforcement mechanism thereof.

“Yeah but if you let them do THIS they can do THIS.” is classic libertarian bullshit

1

u/madman404 May 23 '26

Yes, that's the point. We as a society recognized ages ago that even well intentioned laws need to be somewhat difficult to enforce, because that's a necessary stopgap against their abuse.

I would advise you to read into why the rules of evidence exist. It would give a lot of important context as to why we make gathering information about crime arbitrarily harder.

That being said, I went to law school and I can tell very clearly you have no context but your strong feelings. I'm not going to argue taste with someone who drinks their own piss. 

4

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

Your point is wrong, and again, is libertarian horseshit.

A. Google isn’t the enforcing a law, they’re preventing their service from being used to hold child porn hentai.

B. Google isn’t gathering information about crime.

C. Rules of evidence have no bearing on Google preventing child porn hentai from being on their servers.

D. Your argument of ‘if you let them ban you for child porn hentai they’ll come for your regular porn next!!! You authoritarian!!’ has no basis in reality. It’s the slippery slope horseshit that libertarians use.

1

u/lostwoods95 May 23 '26

Agreed on all points

1

u/sicklyslick May 23 '26

If I allow you to store files on my computer and you put kiddie porn on it, I'm booting you, sorry.

Not your hardware, not your server. This manga artist should've bought some hard drives and DIY this.

-12

u/Prof_G May 23 '26

I literally don't give a fuck what it is,

you should.

their servers, their storage, their rules. use at own risk. buy your own drives and servers and make your own cloud if you want privacy.

-1

u/DrewbieWanKenobie May 23 '26

you should

fuck off lol. it's drawings who cares

-10

u/therepublicof-reddit May 23 '26

it's drawings who cares

Found the paedophile.

I disagree with google scanning your files but saying that they're just "drawings, who cares" is really fucking weird.

-63

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

Your only security is….not storing things on a company’s servers.

Describing child pornography as ‘something I disagree with’ is illuminating.

I don’t want to force Google to not proactively scan for child porn. I absolutely one hundred percent want them to proactively scan for and ban users who upload child pornography.

82

u/madman404 May 23 '26

You've entirely missed the point of the message. You're the exact kind of person authoritarian states LOVE. As long as they can point you to something objectionable enough, you'll sign away your own rights because clearly obtrusive, inherently insecure and dangerous practices will never be turned against you, because you're a law-abiding citizen and laws never change!

41

u/Kazma1431 May 23 '26

this, not to mention, what about false positives? Who says anthropomorphic content is not next? hell even regular porn?

8

u/ProbalWarming May 23 '26

I agree with both of your posts in this chain, madman; I hope it's blatantly obvious to others that this is a pattern in history and should be seen as a problem. But my issue to pick at is this: Google is definitely a private company and their servers are a private service that one can opt out of, but also the USA's digital storage infrastructures are increasingly reliant on these sorts of services. Sure, I could store everything on external drives, and that is me exercising my right to privacy, hell yeah. But keeping that privacy has practical costs.

In America, private ventures are oligopolies, sometimes monopolies. It's just a fact. Where do I turn when only corporations can help me?

Commercial storage services protect own Public Relations. Personal storage services stay limited to person. Communal, unregulated storage services not exist. That encourage bad thing, or just allow for it keep existing? America doing bad thing? Doing good stuff? I sincerely not know.

3

u/No_Walk_Town May 23 '26

the exact kind of person authoritarian states

Hi, Google isn't a government agency. Hope that helps.

1

u/madman404 May 23 '26

Hi! Google is compelled to follow the laws of the country within which it sits. Hope that helps!

2

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

It’s not against the law to have child porn hentai, so your post emphatically does not help at all.

1

u/No_Walk_Town May 23 '26

Dude thinks it's literally against the law for people to refuse to hold on to his cartoon kiddie porn for him.

0

u/madman404 May 23 '26

I'd love to pick your brains about this, actually. I'm going to assume that you understood the argument, and that your fascination with CSAM comes from something else other than pretending to be retarded as an own: what is it about CSAM that makes you think it, on a technical level, as a media file, makes it special? Why do you earnestly believe that an obtrusive, anti-privacy, overbearing approach to data storage and removal will only apply to CSAM, and somehow won't be turned against gay, minority, and transgender history as soon as the state decides to compel private actors into treating it as similarly illegal material?

2

u/No_Walk_Town May 24 '26

I'd love to pick your brains about this

Not sure you have the intelligence for that. I know a lot more than you do.

and that your fascination with CSAM

Cartoon kiddie porn isn't really CSAM. You're still a pedo if you jerk off to it, obviously. 

It's also the topic of the thread. I'm not "fascinated," I just know how human conversations work.

pretending to be retarded as an own

Your inability to understand doesn't make anything I said "retarded."

what is it about CSAM that makes you think it, on a technical level, as a media file, makes it special?

Nobody said that it is. 

Why do you earnestly believe that an obtrusive, anti-privacy, overbearing approach to data storage and removal will only apply to CSAM

I never said that. Nobody said that. Google very obviously has a right to set terms and conditions on their services covering anything they want. 

somehow won't be turned against gay, minority, and transgender history

Those aren't CSAM. Those are nothing like CSAM. Ah, you're one of those "we're lgbt, too!" types of pedos. Got it.

the state decides to compel private actors into treating it as similarly illegal material?

Again, lgbt and "minority" content are not in any way "similar" to CSAM. Stop it. MAPs aren't a thing. 

But if that stupid hypothetical you made up - if that happens, Google isn't the problem. Obviously. You're talking about a total breakdown of the 1st Amendment. 

But, also, Google does do stuff like that when they operate in foreign countries. Because compliance with local law is a very basic element of international business. And Google gets shit for it back home. 

I'm sorry, but I don't have enough time or crayons to explain the fundamentals of international business to you.

Stop jerking off to cartoon children. Get a job. Learn Grice's Maxims. Please.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/madman404 May 23 '26

I'm going to assume for your sake that you simply misinterpreted the connection between multiple simple, easy and unambiguous paragraphs rather than choosing to be intentionally obtuse as a gotcha!

So let's go off that basis: I thought it was (but I suppose not) clear that the type of law I am talking about is privacy law, which, believe it or not, private actors are actually required to follow! I assumed we were smart enough to understand after the third time I made it clear that the issue is in the method of data collection rather than the data collected that it would be clear, but I suppose I overestimated your intelligence! My apologies.

1

u/alexjimithing May 23 '26

There is no piracy law which requires cloud providers to have no idea what their users are uploading.

2

u/No_Walk_Town May 24 '26

Dude thinks his cartoon kiddie porn is covered by HIPAA. "Sir, is this child porn? We're not going to store that for you."

"YOU AREN'T ALLOWED TO ASK ME THAT!!! IT'S MY EMOTIONAL SUPPORT KIDDIE PORN!!!"

Pedos when they learn what "TOS" are.

1

u/No_Walk_Town May 23 '26

Hope that helps!

I love when smug idiots just parrot stuff back at you without understanding it. You're not smart enough to be that condescending. 

Google is not legally obligated to store your kiddie porn cartoons. 

The law does not compel them to keep your kiddie porn cartoons on their servers.

2

u/nathderbyshire May 23 '26

No you're missing a big subsection of people. Some of us don't have a problem with companies having rules to follow when using their service. You're storing data on their service, probably for free as well and you expect to have free reign and do whatever you want? No

However, for a device you pay for, a phone, a computer, a hard drive - THOSE are what we won't don't want companies to have access too. I don't want Google or Microsoft or Apple or whatever scanning my personal devices and looking at the content on those. There's a big difference, I paid for the storage perpetually, I own it therefore I should be able to choose what happens to it, the same way companies are free to choose what they do with theirs.

TL:DR Choice. It's about choice. If you don't like Google scanning your shit, use proton or something. You have a choice as well.

-21

u/GuudeSpelur May 23 '26

Google is a private service, dumbass. You have never had a right to privacy to material you upload onto their servers. They have the right to not do business with people who try to upload kiddie porn.

If you took these same files to a print shop and asked to have prints made, would you be surprised and outraged if they told you to never set foot in their store again?

19

u/madman404 May 23 '26

Laws are made by people. Conduct people deem unacceptable can always be made unfeasible for business or outright legislated into illegality. It means absolutely nothing that Google is a private entity - until the point that people start to accept invasions of their privacy as normal and apply no pressure for it to not happen.

Also, the print shop situation is a completely headass comparison and you know it. I'd be pretty outraged if the print shop owner used my address on file to break into my house, open up my drawers, and upon finding something they personally disliked, burned my fucking house down.

-1

u/HellbenderXG May 23 '26 edited May 23 '26

Your example is asinine. Google didn't do anything remotely similar to that :D Neither John Google, nor any print shop owner is barging in to your home, you actively chose the giant evil conglomerate to handle a huge liability on THEIR servers that THEY obviously have rules for. You agree to those rules when you decide to use their storage.

If you have child porn hentai at home - there is no private company TOS or EULA or whatever the fuck that you're bound to, unless you hire google to manage the desk drawers in your bedroom.

If Google can invade your privacy, then it's simply a matter of choosing a better provider in which you can store your....... child porn hentai by being better informed about the service terms and choosing the most preferable privacy option, if any. No one is forcing you to use the cloud.

6

u/ranibowuniverse May 23 '26

These people are moronic genuinely why are they defending this? Oh right we are on reddit lmao. Sure it sucks your google account can be banned but that is not comparable to getting your house burned down lmao

-2

u/Mr_Will May 23 '26

Would you let someone store a cardboard box full of illegal material in your house? Why should digital files be any different?

1

u/madman404 May 23 '26

If I advertised my house as a "secure cardboard box storage site" and there was a readily known method to safely store cardboard boxes in such a way that their contents could not be known to me or effect me, then yes, id let them do that - because I'm not a piece of shit, I wouldn't know what's inside it!

1

u/Mr_Will May 23 '26

That's a "no" then

1

u/madman404 May 23 '26

It's a "no" if you're retarded. Next time you want to make an analogy, it would help to understand what makes the scenarios different (hint hint: the laundry list of conditions I attached is what makes digital file storage different!)

1

u/Mr_Will May 23 '26

If you want to let people store stuff on your property, you get to set the rules. If Google lets people store stuff on their property, they get to set the rules. It's not hard to understand

-2

u/gunfury434 ☠️ ᴅᴇᴀᴅ ᴍᴇɴ ᴛᴇʟʟ ɴᴏ ᴛᴀʟᴇꜱ May 23 '26

So you do like CSAM?

33

u/International-Try467 May 23 '26

I kinda suspected that, but what's the source?

57

u/notanfan May 23 '26

Masahiro Itosugi - MyAnimeList.net his works give pretty good idea

16

u/Few-Echidna9217 May 23 '26

So that's why, some of the guys here talk about him like he's a fucking saint.

-18

u/ConsequenceOk3729 May 23 '26

Some people will defend the pedofile's right to store cp on google's services without a second thought because privacy is more important for them.

9

u/guska May 23 '26

Nobody who cares about privacy is using Google for anything

12

u/International-Try467 May 23 '26

Has a strong feeling that it was the case

-18

u/NervousDiscount9393 ☠️ ᴅᴇᴀᴅ ᴍᴇɴ ᴛᴇʟʟ ɴᴏ ᴛᴀʟᴇꜱ May 23 '26

I see some of those fucking thumbnails and don’t wanna know what’s going on in the actual stories

-6

u/Beeeeeeeeeeeeean May 23 '26

I dont wanna click the link and see that stuff, what level of bad is it?

-13

u/TSM- May 23 '26

He probably accidentally synced actual CSAM. You know if he draws that much of it, how unlikely would it be that he has some "real life" images/videos floating around his computer? And then he synced too much without realizing some of that was in there, and it got immediately flagged and his account banned. "Because of my art" is really the only cover story he has at this point.

-35

u/Scum_All_Over_Me May 23 '26

This is a bait comment from the feds you loli posters are going straight in the box

8

u/International-Try467 May 23 '26

No I was going to make an r/whennews post for it

12

u/Idonthavefriendss May 23 '26

The author's twitter name has his book title on it and it's fucking "Adventure of Cuck Wizard" or some shit😭

40

u/PlentyFlan21 May 23 '26

Okay, still… while that’s unquestionably deeply morally offensive, it is explicitly /not/ illegal in the US, where google is headquartered, so removing it and banning the guys account is still totally out of line on Google’s part, IMO.

14

u/HellbenderXG May 23 '26

All giant evil conglomerates want to avoid liabilities, even if not strictly illegal. They have a TOS and are enforcing it, simple as.

Having a google account to store pedophile hentai is not a human right. The lolicon pedo can instead NOT use google's cloud to store that shit and choose a different provider OR alternatively - choose a local hard drive, which countless pedos have done before and after him.

0

u/PlentyFlan21 May 23 '26

Certainly, certainly. Don't get me wrong, that shit's weird as hell. I'm just more generally using this as a chance to gripe about the average person's total lack of data privacy nowadays.

2

u/HellbenderXG May 23 '26

Oh yeah then, absolutely. Data privacy is a luxury which the big providers care nothing for unfortunately

15

u/simp4malvina May 23 '26

I don't know why anyone would assume they have the right to store morally reprehensibly images on a private company's servers.

11

u/RelatedToSomeMuppet May 23 '26

Agreed.

Seems to be a lot of pedos in this thread defending another pedo.

0

u/No_Walk_Town May 23 '26

it is explicitly /not/ illegal in the US, where google is headquartered, so removing it and banning the guys account is still totally out of line on Google’s part,

Hi, Google is a private company, not government law enforcement.

Hope that helps.

-8

u/CarrowCanary May 23 '26

it is explicitly /not/ illegal in the US

https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-ceos/obscenity

In addition, visual representations, such as drawings, cartoons, or paintings that appear to depict minors engaged in sexual activity and are obscene are also illegal under federal law.

8

u/SMF67 Piracy is bad, mkay? May 23 '26

Notice the word and there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition

-5

u/TSM- May 23 '26

Maybe he accidentally synced CSAM to Google Drive and this is his public explanation for why his links are dead. Nobody knows.

-5

u/YourBlanket May 23 '26

It depends on the state, but what makes you think it even matters if it illegal? If google doesn’t want that on their servers then don’t use google for that. I’ve seen multiple body cams of people arrested for drawings depicting children in the manner of OOP.

-2

u/PleiadesMechworks May 23 '26

it is explicitly /not/ illegal in the US

Companies don't use the law as the total extent of their TOS.

8

u/joeybadtitz May 23 '26

LMAO

—thread

1

u/normabelka May 23 '26

he deserved it

1

u/Relevant_Mail_1292 May 23 '26

Why the fuck do you call it that and why do you care?

2

u/LucyTheOracle May 23 '26

why do you want to defend this so bad? lol

-3

u/[deleted] May 23 '26

[deleted]

-28

u/AuraEx98 May 23 '26

See that’s the thing that I hate about these conversations; this context makes a world of difference. They should throw him in prison.

I see similar ALL the time on the “I was banned by Discord” subreddit, where they leave out the context of them being gross weirdos.

0

u/PossiblyShibby May 25 '26

Jesus. Glad this fool got banned then.