E.U. Court Rules Facebook Can Be Forced to Delete Content
E.U. Court Rules Facebook Can Be Forced to Delete Content.
The European Court of Justice
ruled that Facebook can be
ordered to remove content
by an individual country.
Content that has been ordered
removed such as posts,
videos and photos, could
also be restricted globally.
The case and its ruling has wide
implications for how social media
content can be regulated.
The decision follows the efforts
of an Austrian politician to force
Facebook to remove negative comments
about her in a post on a personal page.
Former leader of Austria's Green Party
Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek sought to
have "equivalent" posts by other
people removed, as well.
Facebook issued a statement against the
ruling, saying that it "undermines the longstanding
principle that one country does not have the right
to impose its laws on speech on another country.".
This judgment raises critical questions around freedom of expression and the role that internet companies should play in monitoring, interpreting and removing speech that might be illegal in any particular country, Facebook, Statement, via 'The New York Times'.
[The ruling] also opens the door to obligations being imposed on internet companies to proactively monitor content and then interpret if it is ‘equivalent’ to content that has been found to be illegal, Facebook, Statement, via 'The New York Times'.
The European Court of Justice ruling is final.
It highlights a growing divide between
the U.S. and E.U. over big tech regulations
The European Court of Justice
ruled that Facebook can be
ordered to remove content
by an individual country.
Content that has been ordered
removed such as posts,
videos and photos, could
also be restricted globally.
The case and its ruling has wide
implications for how social media
content can be regulated.
The decision follows the efforts
of an Austrian politician to force
Facebook to remove negative comments
about her in a post on a personal page.
Former leader of Austria's Green Party
Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek sought to
have "equivalent" posts by other
people removed, as well.
Facebook issued a statement against the
ruling, saying that it "undermines the longstanding
principle that one country does not have the right
to impose its laws on speech on another country.".
This judgment raises critical questions around freedom of expression and the role that internet companies should play in monitoring, interpreting and removing speech that might be illegal in any particular country, Facebook, Statement, via 'The New York Times'.
[The ruling] also opens the door to obligations being imposed on internet companies to proactively monitor content and then interpret if it is ‘equivalent’ to content that has been found to be illegal, Facebook, Statement, via 'The New York Times'.
The European Court of Justice ruling is final.
It highlights a growing divide between
the U.S. and E.U. over big tech regulations