Intermediaries and human rights – between co-opted law enforcement and human rights protection – PL 03b 2016

---

Please use your own words to describe this session. You may use external references, websites or publications as a source of information or inspiration, if you decide to quote them, please clearly specify the source.

---

To follow the current discussion on this topic, see the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page

Session teaser

Internet intermediaries are positioned between states and users: their position between co-opted law enforcement and human rights protection and the rules under which they act, from terms of service to national and European law, will be openly and critically debated.

Session description

Internet intermediaries enable communication online. They are thus essential to the exercise of human rights online and both essential to all Internet users and vulnerable to interventions by states. Intermediaries have become managers and adjudicators of freedom of expression and other rights. This is a task they neither wanted nor may be best suited to fill. The intermediaries’ terms of service seem like the actual Internet constitutions, while not providing many rights to users. From the Scarlet/Sabam, Telekabel, Digital Rights Ireland, Costeja and Schrems cases before the EU's highest Court to the Delfi and MTE cases before the European Court of Human Rights, European courts have approached the human rights obligations of intermediaries differently. Is it time for a revisit? How can we attribute responsibilities in the triangular relationship of states, intermediaries and users? Should we rely on self-regulation? What laws are applicable to users – can courts in one country change the rules for the activities of intermediaries in other countries? And what procedural guarantees exist for users’ rights in the ‘adjudication’ of conflicts?

Keywords

intermediaries, human rights, enforcement, platforms, gatekeepers, companies

Format

Until 30 April 2016. Please try new interactive formats out. EuroDIG is about dialogue not about statements.

Further reading

• EDRi Booklet: https://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/EDRi_HumanRights_and_PrivLaw_web.pdf Human Rights and Privatised Law Enforcement

• https://edri.org/files/EDRI_CoE.pdf Council of Europe, Human Rights Violations Online, drafted by European Digital Rights, DGI (2014) 31, (04.12.2014)

• https://edri.org/files/privatisedenf/DavidKaye_callICT_EDRi.pdf EDRi submission to UN Special Rapporteur David Kaye's call on freedom of expression and the private sector in the digital age (29.01.2016)

• https://edri.org/eu-internet-forum-document-pool/ EU Internet Forum against terrorist content and hate speech online: Document pool (10.03.2016)

• https://edri.org/files/2016-UN-consultation.pdf EDRi: Input on human rights and preventing and countering violent extremism (18.03.2016)

• http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework (2011)

• http://shiftproject.org/sites/default/files/ECHRSG.ICT_.pdf ICT Sector Guide on Implementing the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

• http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/26/9 Draft Treaty on Transnational Corporations (14.07.2014)

• https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectID=09000016805c1ad4 Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on Human Rights and business (02.03.2016)

• https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Rec%282016%291&Language=lanEnglish&Ver=original&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383 Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on protecting and promoting the right to freedom of expression and the right to private life with regard to network neutrality (13.01.2016)

• https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=2184807 Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on a Guide to human rights for Internet users (16.04.2014)

• https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM%282014%2931&Language=lanEnglish&Ver=addfinal&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383 Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on a guide to human rights for Internet users – Explanatory Memorandum (16.04.2014)

• https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectID=09000016805caa87 Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the protection of human rights with regard to search engines (04.04.2012)

• https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectID=09000016805caa9b Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)4 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the protection of human rights with regard to social networking services (04.04.2012)

• https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1835645 Recommendation CM/Rec(2011)7 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on a new notion of media (21.09.2011)

• https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1266285 Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on measures to promote the respect for freedom of expression and information with regard to Internet filters (26.03.2008)

• https://rankingdigitalrights.org/ Ranking Digital Rights

• http://review.intgovforum.org/igf-2015/dynamic-coalitions/dynamic-coalition-on-platform-responsibility-dc-pr/ Dynamic Coalition on Platform Responsibility’s Recommendations on Terms of Service and Human Rights

• http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002311/231162e.pdf UNESCO Report “Fostering Freedom Online: The Role of Internet Intermediaries” (2014)

• OECD The economic and social role of Internet intermediaries (2010): https://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/44949023.pdf

• Council of Europe/EuroISPA, Human rights guidelines for Internet service providers (2008): http://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016805a39d5

• Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights "The right to privacy in the digital age" (30.06.2014): http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session27/Documents/A.HRC.27.37_en.pdf

• Ways to tackle online hateful content proposed by the German Task Force against illegal online hate speech (15.12.2015): https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Artikel/12152015_TaskForceErgebnispapier_eng.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

• FRA/Council of Europe Handbook on European data protection law (2014): http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014-handbook-data-protection-law-2nd-ed_en.pdf

• The right to privacy in the digital age, Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680304b59

• Article 19's Report “Internet intermediaries: Dilemma of Liability” (2013): https://www.article19.org/data/files/Intermediaries_ENGLISH.pdf

• “Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability” (different civil society organisations, 2015): https://www.manilaprinciples.org/principles

• Cyberhate: an issue of continued concern for the Council of Europe’s Anti-Racism Commission (2015): http://www.coe.int/t/democracy/source/publications/Cyberhate_2015_en.pdf

• Governance of Online Intermediaries: Observations from a Series of National Case Studies, Berkman Center Research Publication No. 2015-5 (18.02.2015): http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2566364

• Offensive Online Comments - New ECtHR Judgment – commentary by Dirk Voorhoof and Eva Lievens (15.02.2016): http://echrblog.blogspot.fr/2016/02/offensive-online-comments-new-ecthr.html

• Criminal justice access to data in the cloud: challenges, (Council of Europe, 26.05.2016): https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680304b59

• Welcome to the Jungle: the Liability of Internet Intermediaries for Privacy Violations in Europe (IVIR, 2015): http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1720

Relevant judgements

• Judgement of the CJEU, Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM), (case C‑70/10): http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=115202&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=166646

• Judgement of the CJEU, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and Others (case C-293/12) and Kärntner Landesregierung and Others(C-594/12): http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62012CJ0293

• Judgement of the CJEU, UPC Telekabel Wien GmbH v Constantin Film Verleih GmbH, Wega Filmproduktionsgesellschaft mbH (case C-314/12):http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=149924&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=166101

• Judgement of the CJEU, Google Spain SL,Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD), Mario Costeja González (case C‑131/12): http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=152065&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=472733

• Judgement of the CJEU, Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner (case C-362/14): http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=169195&mode=lst&pageIndex=1&dir=&occ=first&part=1&text=&doclang=EN&cid=334679

• Judgement of the ECtHR Delfi AS v. Estonia (case no. 64569/09): http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-155105

• Judgement of the ECtHR Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu ZRT v. Hungary (case no. 22947/13): http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-160314

• Judgement of the ECtHR Yildirim v. Turkey (case no. 3111/10): http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-115705

• Judgement of the ECtHR Cengiz and Others v. Turkey (cases no. 48226/10 and 14027/11): http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-159188

• Judgement of the ECtHR K.U. v. Finland (case no. 2872/02): https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/dataprotection/Judgments/K.U.%20v.%20FINLAND%20en.pdf

People

Name, institution, country of residence

• Focal Point

Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, Cluster of Excellence "Normative Orders", University of Frankfurt/Main, Germany

• Key participants

Until 15 May 2016. Key participants (workshop) are experts willing to provide their knowledge during a session – not necessarily on stage. Key participants should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session. Panellist (plenary) will be selected and assigned by the org team, ensuring a stakeholder balanced dialogue also considering gender and geographical balance. Panellists should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session. Please provide short CV’s of the participants involved in your session at the Wiki or link to another source.

• Moderator

Until 15 May 2016. The moderator is the facilitator of the session at the event. Moderators are responsible for including the audience and encouraging a lively interaction among all session attendants. Please make sure the moderator takes a neutral role and can balance between all speakers.

• Please provide short CV of the moderator of your session at the Wiki or link to another source.
• Remote moderator

Until 15 May 2016. The remote moderator is in charge of facilitating participation via digital channels such as WebEx and social medial (Twitter, facebook). Remote moderators monitor and moderate the social media channels and the participants via WebEX and forward questions to the session moderator. Please contact the EuroDIG secretariat if you need help to find a remote moderator.

• Org team

Organising team is a group of people shaping the session. Every interested individual can become a member of an organising team (org team).

• Reporter

Until 15 May 2016. The reporter takes notes during the session and formulates 3 (max. 5) bullet points at the end of each session that:

1. are summarised on a slide and presented to the audience at the end of each session
2. relate to the particular session and to European Internet governance policy
3. are forward looking and propose goals and activities that can be initiated after EuroDIG (recommendations)
4. are in (rough) consensus with the audience
5. are to be submitted to the secretariat within 48 hours after the session took place

Please provide short CV of the reporter of your session at the Wiki or link to another source and contact the EuroDIG secretariat if you need help to find a reporter.

Current discussion

See the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page.

Conference call. Schedules and minutes

• dates for virtual meetings or coordination calls
• short summary of calls or email exchange
• be as open and transparent as possible in order to allow others to get involved and contact you
• use the wiki not only as the place to publish results but also to summarize and publish the discussion process

Mailing list

Contact: pl3b@eurodig.org

Final report

Deadline 2016

Session twitter hashtag

Hashtag: