Fake evidence? Maybe, but I think the primary worry is the incentive to lower the bar to the point they ruin lives.

The customer in the article had a non-pornographic image of a naked child. Was it just baby photos? The classic "naked baby on a fur rug" pose? Grandkids in the pool? The article doesn't say. All we know is the judge threw out the case as a non-issue.

But the guy's career as a doctor is over. His life is devastated. No matter how clear his innocence is announced, he'll always be stained.

Would the Best Buy employee have reported the image if there wasn't the chance of compensation? Depends on what the image actually was, of course. Many innocent photos of children can make us uncomfortable depending on the circumstances; it's human nature to be a bit oversensitive about any situation involving kids. Some false alarms will be inevitable.

But if I was most likely a young, ignorant low level tech and someone offered me $500 (and the praise of a high authority), I could see myself pushing the button on every photo of a kid in a wet swimming suit.

Paying people to report crimes in certain situations inevitably results in many more false alarms, which can be irreversibly damaging to the accused.

I find it hard to believe a computer tech encountering real child porn needs to be incentivised to report it.