Additionally, from Alexa's term of use, it clearly states they do not guarantee the content
>4.2 Functionality; Content. We do not guarantee that Alexa or its functionality or content (including traffic, health, or stock information) is accurate, reliable, always available, or complete. You may encounter content through Alexa that you find offensive, indecent, or objectionable. Amazon has no responsibility or liability for such content
So without even readying the terms or proper usage of the device, many seem to be making broad assumptions, and literally just making up the obligations, actions, and legal ramifications.
I'm not a fan of Amazon, and frankly would never have alexa in my home because of their terms of use and conditions. But I find myself defending their position because of the outlandish statements.
If I give my child a speaking rubber ducky as a bathroom toy, and that toy would include phrases like "I bet you can't keep under water for more than a minute" or "I want to go swimming in the ocean", I'm pretty certain that the product will be quickly pulled from the market, even though the $35 toy is made from the safest, non-flammable, non-toxic plastics.
If a child answers a phone, and someone on the other end tells them to harm themselves, the phone wouldn't be considered the risk.
Indeed. So what's on the other end of the Alexa line, legally speaking?
is some how going to protect children from the internet
The child didn't access the Internet, now did it? Alexa accessed the Internet on behalf of the child. As such, it acted as the child's agent and should be expected to tailor its reponses to the child. If Amazon doens't want that, it should not allow Alexa to respond to children's voices.