《滥用暴力材料共享法》:澳大利亚监管社交媒体公司的新法律的现实和影响

Jasmine Valcic
{"title":"《滥用暴力材料共享法》:澳大利亚监管社交媒体公司的新法律的现实和影响","authors":"Jasmine Valcic","doi":"10.53300/001c.19107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On 15 March 2019, a Facebook Live video was broadcast from Christchurch, New Zealand, documenting a terror attack which resulted in the death of fifty-one people. This attack highlighted a weakness in social media protections and a gap in legislation globally. In response, the Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Act 2019 (Cth) seeks to make internet service and social media providers accountable for the removal of abhorrent and violent content. This legislation sent waves through the international community, attracting criticisms for its fast adoption, perceived unrealistic obligations and harsh penalties, as well as its broad extraterritorial reach. This article will explore these criticisms. It asks, how is the Act exercising extraterritorial jurisdiction? Is there an unrealistic burden created? And if there is a breach, who will be charged? The article concludes that if these challenges are not adequately addressed, the Act will not only fail to achieve its goal of reducing the accessibility of abhorrent violent material, but will also pose a serious threat to the protection of human rights.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Materials Act: The realities and implications of Australia’s new laws regulating social media companies\",\"authors\":\"Jasmine Valcic\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001c.19107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On 15 March 2019, a Facebook Live video was broadcast from Christchurch, New Zealand, documenting a terror attack which resulted in the death of fifty-one people. This attack highlighted a weakness in social media protections and a gap in legislation globally. In response, the Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Act 2019 (Cth) seeks to make internet service and social media providers accountable for the removal of abhorrent and violent content. This legislation sent waves through the international community, attracting criticisms for its fast adoption, perceived unrealistic obligations and harsh penalties, as well as its broad extraterritorial reach. This article will explore these criticisms. It asks, how is the Act exercising extraterritorial jurisdiction? Is there an unrealistic burden created? And if there is a breach, who will be charged? The article concludes that if these challenges are not adequately addressed, the Act will not only fail to achieve its goal of reducing the accessibility of abhorrent violent material, but will also pose a serious threat to the protection of human rights.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.19107\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bond Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.19107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2019年3月15日,一段来自新西兰克赖斯特彻奇的脸书直播视频记录了一起导致51人死亡的恐怖袭击。这次袭击凸显了社交媒体保护的薄弱环节和全球立法的空白。作为回应,《2019年刑法修正案(分享虐待暴力材料)法》(Cth)试图让互联网服务和社交媒体提供商对删除令人憎恶的暴力内容负责。这项立法在国际社会掀起了波澜,因其迅速通过、被视为不切实际的义务和严厉的惩罚以及其广泛的域外影响而招致批评。本文将探讨这些批评。它问道,该法案是如何行使域外管辖权的?是否产生了不切实际的负担?如果有违规行为,谁会受到指控?文章的结论是,如果这些挑战得不到充分解决,该法案不仅无法实现减少令人憎恶的暴力材料可及性的目标,而且还会对保护人权构成严重威胁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Materials Act: The realities and implications of Australia’s new laws regulating social media companies
On 15 March 2019, a Facebook Live video was broadcast from Christchurch, New Zealand, documenting a terror attack which resulted in the death of fifty-one people. This attack highlighted a weakness in social media protections and a gap in legislation globally. In response, the Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Act 2019 (Cth) seeks to make internet service and social media providers accountable for the removal of abhorrent and violent content. This legislation sent waves through the international community, attracting criticisms for its fast adoption, perceived unrealistic obligations and harsh penalties, as well as its broad extraterritorial reach. This article will explore these criticisms. It asks, how is the Act exercising extraterritorial jurisdiction? Is there an unrealistic burden created? And if there is a breach, who will be charged? The article concludes that if these challenges are not adequately addressed, the Act will not only fail to achieve its goal of reducing the accessibility of abhorrent violent material, but will also pose a serious threat to the protection of human rights.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
‘Often Fails to Give Close Attention to Detail’: Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Criminal Justice Offender Populations A Practitioner’s Perspective Concerning the Links between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the Criminal Justice System Understanding the Nature of ADHD and the Vulnerability of Those with the Condition Who Fall Foul of the Criminal Justice System Corporate Purpose and the Misleading Shareholder vs Stakeholder Dichotomy Legal Considerations in Machine-Assisted Decision-Making: Planning and Building as a Case Study
×
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