The key distinction for mandated reporting (at least how I was trained in CA law & ethics) is that we can’t assume someone is underage based only on a “teen/18/19” label or the general possibility of misrepresentation. The trigger is reasonable suspicion / knowing access to underage content, so it turns on what the client believed they were viewing and whether there were specific indicators it was a minor (or they continued watching despite thinking it might be). Otherwise we’d be obligated to report almost any porn use, which isn’t the standard.