Pavel Durov’s arrest sparks debate about online privacy and freedom of expression

The detention and indictment of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov has put the debate over online privacy and free speech in the spotlight, with some experts wondering whether the arrest is a sign of what is to come for U.S. tech companies and their executives.

Durov, who has French and Russian citizenship, faces a total of six charges. He is accused of “complicity” in the distribution of child pornography, illegal transactions, money laundering and drug trafficking that allegedly took place via the messaging app, according to a translated version of the statement from the Paris prosecutor’s office.

He spent several days in police custody and was interrogated. He was released on Wednesday morning ahead of his court date where he was formally charged. He was released from custody after posting bail of 5 million euros and placed under judicial supervision.

The arrest follows a judicial investigation launched last month against an unnamed individual, who is accused of, among other things, “complicity” in illegal transactions, possession and distribution of child pornography, possession and sale of narcotics and organized fraud.

Critics attributed Durov’s arrest to concerns about free speech and the protection of the privacy of user content.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk – who throttled content moderation on his X after buying the social media platform in 2022 – voiced his support for Pavel this week. Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski also claimed France had “crossed a red line” by arresting Durov for failing to censor free speech.

Due to different security protocols, Telegram cannot be directly compared to many US social media platforms, experts said.

Still, Durov’s arrest remains a concern for U.S. technology companies operating abroad as European countries tighten regulations.

“I think it’s certainly a cause for concern for U.S. tech companies, U.S. founders and anyone who’s thinking about starting a tech company in France,” Will Duffield, a fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, told The Hill.

“The lack of a process, or the apparent lack of a process, should be the greatest concern here.”

Telegram offers its users the ability to send messages with end-to-end encryption, as well as large group chats with up to 200,000 users. Meta’s WhatsApp has a maximum of 1,024 users.

“Given that they’re willing to take this step with a company like Telegram, I think that says something about the direct messaging feature of all social media companies,” Jane Bambauer, a law professor at the University of Florida, told The Hill.

Duffield said before the indictment that U.S. companies should be “very concerned” if the allegations against Durov relate to the encryption of content, but they were less concerned about Telegram’s alleged refusal to hand over information or documents requested by authorities.

“France is supposedly the first industrialized country in the world with a strong tradition of the rule of law. And yet something that could have been treated as a civil matter with summonses, subpoenas and possibly fines is instead handled by detaining the CEO of a company as he gets off a plane,” he said.

Still, this suggests that a conflict is emerging between American and European values ​​regarding freedom of speech and the privacy of user content, Duffield and Bambauer said.

The European Union has already launched several investigations under the Digital Services Act (DSA), a comprehensive package of technology regulations that came into force earlier this year. The DSA is designed to limit the power of big tech companies and protect Europeans from data breaches and abusive content.

Despite bipartisan support for greater regulation of the technology industry, the U.S. government has so far made no significant changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which largely protects social media platforms from lawsuits over material posted by users.

“Some Europeans, particularly European regulators who have become stronger because of the Digital Services Act, have recently taken a kind of tyrannical attitude towards American technology companies. They think there’s a new sheriff in town or something. There hasn’t been much resistance to that from the United States,” Duffield said.

The two regulatory laws “show a big difference right from the ground floor, right from the start,” said Bambauer.

Retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman attracted attention over the weekend when he said Musk should be concerned about Durov’s arrest.

“Although Durov has French citizenship and was arrested for violating French law, this has wider implications for other social media, including Twitter,” he wrote on X. “There is a growing intolerance towards platform platforms [disinformation] & malign influence & a growing appetite for accountability. Musk should be nervous.”

While he doesn’t believe the two technology leaders are directly comparable at this point, Vindman told The Hill that this shows a “growing desire for accountability.”

“That doesn’t necessarily mean that the US could or will take action because, as I said, we have a different view of free speech,” he said. “The US has taken it as an attack on free speech, but my main point is that I think the Europeans will be increasingly forceful in dealing with platforms that see themselves as just platforms and have no interest in moderating content.”

Jared Carter, an assistant professor at Vermont Law and Graduate School, rejected the free speech argument when it came to Telegram’s alleged refusal to hand over material to authorities, adding that the U.S. Constitution does not apply in France.

“I do not believe the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution applies because unless there is a properly issued subpoena or a valid search warrant for company records, the First Amendment does not protect a business owner or corporation from complying with or searching an otherwise lawful subpoena,” he said.