3 | 2017 Volume 8 (2017) Issue 3 ISSN 2190-3387
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
3 | 2017 Volume 8 (2017) Issue 3 ISSN 2190-3387 Editorial: Intermediary Liability as a Human Rights Issue by Martin Husovec The Intermediary Conundrum: Cyber-Regulators, Cyber-Police or Both? by Luca Belli and Cristiana Sappa Law and Electronic Commerce Information Technology, Intellectual Property, Journal of The Death of ‘No Monitoring Obligations’: A Story of Untameable Monsters by Giancarlo F. Frosio The Role of the Principle of Effective Judicial Protection in Relation to Website Blocking Injunctions by Saulius Lukas Kalėda The Power of Positive Thinking: Intermediary Liability and the Effective Enjoyment of the Right to Freedom of Expression by Aleksandra Kuczerawy What Does It Matter Who is Browsing? ISP Liability and the Right to Anonymity by Ciarán Burke and Alexandra Molitorisová Editors: Thomas Dreier Axel Metzger Gerald Spindler Lucie Guibault Miquel Peguera www.jipitec.eu Séverine Dusollier Chris Reed Karin Sein Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law Table Of Contents Volume 8 Issue 3 November 2017 www.jipitec.eu [email protected] Special Issue: A joint publication of: Prof. Dr. Thomas Dreier, M. C. J., Intermediary Liability as a Human KIT - Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Zentrum für Angewandte Rights Issue Rechtswissenschaft (ZAR), Vincenz-Prießnitz-Str. 3, 76131 Karlsruhe Germany Prof. Dr. Axel Metzger, LL. M., Humboldt-Universität zu Editorial: Intermediary Liability as a Human Rights Issue Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, by Martin Husovec 181 10099 Berlin The Intermediary Conundrum: Prof. Dr. Gerald Spindler, Dipl.-Ökonom, Georg-August- Cyber-Regulators, Cyber-Police or Both? Universität Göttingen, by Luca Belli and Cristiana Sappa 183 Platz der Göttinger Sieben 6, 37073 Göttingen The Death of ‘No Monitoring Obligations’: A Story of Untameable Monsters Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, by Giancarlo F. Frosio 199 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Georg-August-Universität The Role of the Principle of Effective Judicial Protection in Relation Göttingen are corporations under to Website Blocking Injunctions public law, and represented by by Saulius Lukas Kalėda 216 their respective presidents. Editors: The Power of Positive Thinking: Intermediary Liability and the Thomas Dreier Effective Enjoyment of the Right to Freedom of Expression? Axel Metzger by Aleksandra Kuczerawy 226 Gerald Spindler Lucie Guibault What Does It Matter Who is Browsing? Miquel Peguera ISP Liability and the Right to Anonymity Séverine Dusollier by Ciarán Burke and Alexandra Molitorisová 238 Chris Reed Karin Sein Board of Correspondents: Graeme Dinwoodie Christophe Geiger Ejan Mackaay Rita Matulionyte Giovanni M. Riccio Cyrill P. Rigamonti Olav Torvund Mikko Välimäki Rolf H. Weber Andreas Wiebe Raquel Xalabarder Editor-in-charge for this special issue: Martin Husovec Technical Editor: Philipp Schmechel ISSN 2190-3387 Funded by Martin Husovec Editorial Intermediary Liability as a Human Rights Issue by Martin Husovec* © 2017 Martin Husovec Everybody may disseminate this article by electronic means and make it available for download under the terms and conditions of the Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL). A copy of the license text may be obtained at http://nbn-resolving. de/urn:nbn:de:0009-dppl-v3-en8. Recommended citation: Martin Husovec, Editorial: Intermediary Liability as a Human Rights Issue, 8 (2017) JIPITEC 181 para 1. 1 In early summer 2016, a number of scholars from ‘ultimatums’, such as the Code of Conduct, which diverse backgrounds met in Tilburg to discuss issues are meant to incentivize a change without amending of intermediary liability and human rights.1 After the laws. Second, there are a number of new policy a few passionate debates - as well as a round of proposals across the globe, which usually try to drinks - a general feeling arose that the social issues legally impose more proactive measures and not just at stake require a dedicated forum. To keep the wait for the firms to improve things on their own. momentum, we decided to set up an informal group Third, the courts are becoming increasingly involved - ‘Intermediary Liability and Human Rights’ - to kick- in shaping how the environment should look like; off periodical meetings and, on the kind invitation the case-law surrounding hyperlinks and website- of Prof. Spindler, to launch a paper symposium with blocking are perhaps the most salient symbols of JIPITEC. This dedicated volume presents the fruits this trend. And lastly, human rights law and its of this intellectual exercise. Its goal is to highlight community is awakening to the new ‘intermediated’ that design of intermediary liability rules and their realities of the online world. real-world effects can and also should be heavily scrutinized from the human rights law point of 3 To name just a few recent initiatives and view. In this sense, Judge Spano’s recent article,2 in developments. Within the last few years, the which he argues that the existing ECtHR case-law European Court of Human Rights received more is best understood only as a starting point and of than a dozen of new cases in the area.4 The limited precedential value, is a perfect invitation for Council of Europe recently conducted a large scale scholars in this area to join us.3 4 To mention just intermediary liability cases stricto 2 To borrow from the band the Scorpions, ‘wind sensu: ECtHR, K.U. v. Finland (App. no. 2872/02); of change’ is in the air. Despite the fact that ECtHR, Yildirim v. Turkey (App. Nr 3111/10); intermediary liability rules have been around for ECtHR, Akdeniz v. Turkey (App. No 25165/94); some time, the related debates seem to be increasing ECtHR, Cengiz and Others v. Turkey (App. no. in intensity. The selection of contributions in this 48226/10 and 14027/11); ECtHR, Delfi AS v. Estonia issue illustrates this very well. First of all, impatience (Application no. 64569/09) – two decisions; of policy makers results in different types of ECtHR, Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu ZRT v. Hungary (Application no. * Assistant Professor at the Tilburg University (Tilburg 22947/13); ECtHR, Rolf Anders Daniel Pihl v. Institute for Law, Technology and Society & Tilburg Law Sweden (App. Nr. 74742/14); ECtHR, Payam Tamiz and Economics Center). v United Kingdom (App. no. 3877/14) and pending 1 After the Tilburg meeting organized by me and Tilburg cases of: Kharitonov v Russia (App no. 10795/14); Institute for Law, Technology and Society (TILT), the second Grigoriy Nikolayevich Kablis v. Russia (App. no. meeting took place in Amsterdam and was organized by Tarlach McGonagle at the Institute for Information Law 59663/17); OOO Flavus and others v. Russia (App. (IViR), University of Amsterdam. No. 12468/15). The list of the related cases is 2 Robert Spano, ‘Intermediary Liability for Online User much broader, see - CoE, ‘Internet: case-law of Comments under the European Convention on Human the European Court of Human Rights’, available at Rights’ (2017) Human Rights Law Review, p. 11-12. <http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Research_ 3 Feel free to drop me an email. report_internet_ENG.pdf>. 3 181 2017 Editorial study regarding filtering and blocking policies escape any liability. Moreover, they emphasize in its Member States and is working on a set of intermediaries’ regulatory role while contractually political recommendations.5 The civil society regulating the content and applications that their globally launched a discussion about the principles users access and share. regarding the best governmental practices.6 Open Society Foundations commissioned a report on the 7 Frosio argues that we are witnessing the rise of issue of human rights and self-regulation that was monitoring obligations that are being imposed masterfully prepared by IViR.7 The Internet protocol on online intermediaries around the world. He community has just adopted a new tool to respect observes that proactive monitoring and filtering are human rights in the area of Internet standards.8 increasingly finding their way in the legal system as the preferred enforcement strategy through 4 A sceptic may wonder, why all this fuss all of a legislation, judicial decisions, as well as private sudden? ordering across the entire spectrum of legal areas. He interprets this trend as the death of ‘no monitoring 5 Balkin convincingly argues9 that this is due to obligations’. emerging privatized control of speech by ‘new governors’10 that challenges our existing human 8 Kalėda then zooms in at one of such emerging rights safe-guards. As also IViR’s report highlights, policies that is heavily used in the European Union, because the entities are private and our human namely injunctions against intermediaries. In his rights ‘supervision’ only indirect, we are struggling contribution, he analyses how the principle of to approach them in the traditional ways. Unlike effective judicial protection shapes the enforcement the government, these gatekeepers are primarily practice of the website blocking. He argues that these responding not to a process of political accountability, novel injunctions are affecting the rights of multiple but to (mostly economic) incentives on the market. third parties. As a consequence, we should give more But if market outcomes are driven only partly by weight to procedural fundamental rights stemming the legal institutions, then governments can be at from Article 47 of the Charter. This new perspective best ‘co-architects of the environment’. What is has, in his view, several advantages, such as it must then a right approach for achieving human-rights be applied by the courts of their own motion and compliant outcomes? Can existing doctrines be it could lead to the establishment of a minimum always relied on? The contributions of this dedicated procedural standard across the Member States. volume all reflect on and demonstrate this challenge. 9 Kuczerawy in her contribution reviews the 6 To begin with, Belli and Sappa provide a high- possibilities of the existing legal framework from level discussion of how intermediary liability the perspective of freedom of expression.