Some apps may seem ordinary, but they actually have hidden hidden camera functions? According to a recent report by The Paper, some paid apps downloaded from mobile app stores can disguise themselves as tools such as browsers, maps, calculators, etc. Users can use hidden buttons on the interface to complete covert filming. In addition, secretly filmed materials are only saved within the app by default and will not appear in the phone's photo album or gallery, making it difficult for people to detect. Some netizens are concerned about personal privacy issues and believe that such apps will provide convenience for criminals to secretly take photos, and should be taken down; Some people have also suggested that technology itself is not good or bad, and users can use it for investigation and evidence collection. It can be seen that the core of the dispute among all parties is whether these apps are just a type of application of neutral technology, or whether they open the door for illegal activities? What is technology neutrality? Some opinions suggest that technology, as a tool, has value neutrality, and its use is often determined by users. However, technology itself may have both infringing and non infringing uses. In fact, for market-oriented products, every research and development process is permeated with the value orientation of the business entity, and every functional design is closely related to the business objectives, making it difficult to be neutral. Specifically, there are three types of paid functions that have raised doubts about the aforementioned spy photography apps with "vests". Firstly, some apps have a "launch application disguise" function, where users can replace the app's icon with other software "skins" such as calculators and maps; Secondly, some APP interfaces have hidden shooting buttons, allowing photographers to secretly take photos while pretending to view the navigation; Thirdly, photos or videos taken using the aforementioned app are stored in hidden locations within the software, and some require a password to view. So, what is the purpose of designing these features? Is there a tendency to induce crime? At the same time, in the comment section of some apps, some users gave low ratings, saying, "After downloading, I found out it was for secretly taking photos, it's so disgusting. Some people also gave high scores, leaving comments stating that they had taken many things that they wouldn't normally take. In this situation, are the developers and providers of such apps turning a blind eye to the risk of technology being abused? If one knows that the technology has a high possibility of being used to infringe on the privacy of others, but does not take any measures to prevent it, and even evades supervision and provides convenience for infringement through disguised interfaces, do they need to bear corresponding legal responsibilities? In judicial practice, some parties may argue for technical neutrality. In a public case, a video platform team once designed a unique video sharing technology and used it to engage in commercial activities. Despite being clearly warned and punished, they still ignored illegal videos that they had the ability to control and delete, and tried their best to induce them. In this regard, the parties claim technological neutrality, while the court finds that their actions constitute infringement and does not apply the principle of technological neutrality to grant legal liability exemption. From this, it can be seen that technological neutrality does not mean technological usage behavior neutrality. According to the Public Security Administration Punishment Law, those who engage in voyeurism, secretly take photos, eavesdrop, or spread others' privacy will face corresponding public security penalties. If the content of the secretly filmed content involves obscene and pornographic elements, and the person secretly filmed for profit, it may also constitute a criminal offense. For app developers and users alike, the legal red line cannot be crossed. App stores should also bear corresponding responsibilities for review and supervision. On the one hand, they should strictly monitor the apps applied for listing to ensure that their functions are legal and compliant; On the other hand, once a problematic app is discovered, measures such as taking it down should be taken in a timely manner to prevent it from causing greater harm. Technology neutrality is not a "shield" for privacy infringement. We should not only see the positive side of technological innovation, but also be vigilant about the potential infringement risks it may bring. Whether it is technology developers, app stores, or users, they should strictly abide by laws and regulations, fulfill their obligations, and jointly promote technology towards novelty, goodness, and advancement. (New Society)