Taking Fundamental Rights Seriously in the Digital Services Act's Platform Liability Regime

Giancarlo Frosio, Christophe Geiger
{"title":"Taking Fundamental Rights Seriously in the Digital Services Act's Platform Liability Regime","authors":"Giancarlo Frosio, Christophe Geiger","doi":"10.1111/eulj.12475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article highlights how the EU fundamental rights framework should inform the liability regime of platforms foreseen in secondary EU law, in particular with regard to the reform of the E-commerce directive by the Digital Services Act. In order to identify all possible tensions between the liability regime of platforms on the one hand, and fundamental rights on the other hand, and in order to contribute to a well-balanced and proportionate European legal instrument, this article addresses these potential conflicts from the standpoint of users (those who share content and those who access it), platforms, regulators and other stakeholders involved. Section 2 delves into the intricate landscape of online intermediary liability, interrogating how the E-Commerce Directive and the emerging Digital Services Act grapple with the delicate equilibrium between shielding intermediaries and upholding the competing rights of other stakeholders. The article then navigates in Section 3 the fraught terrain of fundamental rights as articulated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) under the aegis of the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter. This section poses an urgent inquiry: can the DSA's foundational principles reconcile these legal frameworks in a manner that fuels democracy rather than stifles it through inadvertent censorship? Section 4 then delves into the intricate relationship between fundamental rights and the DSA reform. This section conducts a comprehensive analysis of the key provisions of the DSA, emphasising how they underscore the importance of fundamental rights. In addition to mapping out the framework's strengths, the section also identifies existing limitations within the DSA and suggests potential pathways for further refinement and improvement. This article concludes by outlining key avenues for achieving a balanced and fundamental rights-compliant regulatory framework for platform liability within the EU.","PeriodicalId":501574,"journal":{"name":"European Law Journal ","volume":"198 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Law Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12475","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article highlights how the EU fundamental rights framework should inform the liability regime of platforms foreseen in secondary EU law, in particular with regard to the reform of the E-commerce directive by the Digital Services Act. In order to identify all possible tensions between the liability regime of platforms on the one hand, and fundamental rights on the other hand, and in order to contribute to a well-balanced and proportionate European legal instrument, this article addresses these potential conflicts from the standpoint of users (those who share content and those who access it), platforms, regulators and other stakeholders involved. Section 2 delves into the intricate landscape of online intermediary liability, interrogating how the E-Commerce Directive and the emerging Digital Services Act grapple with the delicate equilibrium between shielding intermediaries and upholding the competing rights of other stakeholders. The article then navigates in Section 3 the fraught terrain of fundamental rights as articulated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) under the aegis of the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter. This section poses an urgent inquiry: can the DSA's foundational principles reconcile these legal frameworks in a manner that fuels democracy rather than stifles it through inadvertent censorship? Section 4 then delves into the intricate relationship between fundamental rights and the DSA reform. This section conducts a comprehensive analysis of the key provisions of the DSA, emphasising how they underscore the importance of fundamental rights. In addition to mapping out the framework's strengths, the section also identifies existing limitations within the DSA and suggests potential pathways for further refinement and improvement. This article concludes by outlining key avenues for achieving a balanced and fundamental rights-compliant regulatory framework for platform liability within the EU.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在数字服务法案的平台责任制度中认真对待基本权利
本文强调欧盟基本权利框架应如何为欧盟二级法律中预见的平台责任制度提供信息,特别是关于《数字服务法》对电子商务指令的改革。为了确定一方面是平台责任制度与另一方面是基本权利之间所有可能的紧张关系,并且为了促进平衡和相称的欧洲法律文书,本文从用户(分享内容的人和访问内容的人)、平台、监管机构和其他相关利益相关者的角度解决了这些潜在的冲突。第2节深入探讨了网络中介责任的复杂格局,探讨了《电子商务指令》和新兴的《数字服务法》如何在保护中介机构和维护其他利益相关者的竞争权利之间取得微妙的平衡。文章随后在第三部分阐述了欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)和欧盟法院(CJEU)在《欧洲人权公约》和《欧盟宪章》的支持下阐述的令人担忧的基本权利领域。这部分提出了一个紧迫的问题:DSA的基本原则能否调和这些法律框架,以一种促进民主的方式,而不是通过无意的审查扼杀民主?第四节深入探讨了基本权利与DSA改革之间错综复杂的关系。本节对《残疾人权利法》的关键条款进行全面分析,强调它们如何强调基本权利的重要性。除了绘制框架的优势之外,本节还确定了DSA中现有的限制,并提出了进一步改进和改进的潜在途径。本文最后概述了实现欧盟平台责任平衡和基本权利合规监管框架的关键途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The necessity defence in (the Swiss) climate protest cases: Democratic contestation in the age of climate activism ‘Foot in the Door’ or ‘Door in the Face’? The development of legal strategies in European climate litigation between structure and agency Guest editorial: Courts as an arena for societal change: An appraisal in the age of “environmental democracy”; In this issue What climate litigation reveals about judicial competence A Whisper from Mother Earth
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1