Top

Published in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

3. The Immunity of Internet Intermediaries Reconsidered?

Author : Georgios N. Yannopoulos

Published in: The Responsibilities of Online Service Providers

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

In Web 2.0 anyone can become a producer of information. As a result, countless ‘intermediaries’ operate as go-betweens and facilitators to transmit such information. In view of the above, we seek to examine whether they are liable for unlawful or harmful content contained in these transmissions. In 2000 the EU Electronic Commerce Directive (ECD) established a status of immunity for access, cache and host providers. Subsequent legislation regulating electronic communications, data protection, secrecy of communication and enforcement of intellectual property has dramatically increased the obligations of intermediaries and, hence, the degree of their liability, albeit on a cases by case basis and without necessarily challenging the provisions of ECD.

This chapter seeks to identify the exact role of the new power players in the digital world and to discover the boundaries between immunity and liability of Internet intermediaries. Especially their behaviour as quasi judges for defending legitimacy in cyberspace is examined in relation to the need for intervention by the judicial authorities. Methods and policies in order to foster an ethos of compliance and social responsibility are proposed for those new gatekeepers in comparison to positive laws and regulations.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter The Moral Responsibilities of Online Service Providers

next chapter Is Google Responsible for Providing Fair and Unbiased Results?

See Yannopoulos (2013b), p. 9 and Yannopoulos (2014), p. 787.

Since ancient times the messenger was considered liable cf. verse 277 of Sophocles’ Antigone: “…That no man loves the messenger of ill…” (transl. R. Jebb).

G. Yannopoulos (2013b), op. cit. pp. 55–56.

Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8.6.2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce), OJ L178, 17.7.2000, p. 0001–0016.

See the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee – First Report on the application of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce), COM/2003/0702 final, section 4.6, par. 64.

See for example Ufer (2007), p. 38 and Schmoll (2001), p. 38.

See in that vein the Introductory Report on the Proposal for the German Law for Electronic Commerce (ΒΤ-Drs 14/6098 of 17-5-2001, Elektronischer Geschäftsverkehrgesetz – EGG harmonisation of the ECD) stating that immunity concerns also criminal law (“…die Beschränkungen der Vernatwortlichkeit gelten auch für den Bereich des Strafrechts…”).

Directive 2009/140/EC, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25.11.2009 amending Directives 2002/21/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, 2002/19/EC on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities, and 2002/20/EC on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services, OJ L337, 18.12.2009, p. 37–69 (Better regulation directive).

Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12.7.2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), OJ L 105, 31.7.2002, p. 37–47.

Directive 2001/29/EC, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22.5.2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10–19. For the most recent ECJ decision regarding hyperlinks and communication to the public, see Case C-160/15 GS Media BV v Sanoma Media Netherlands BV, Playboy Enterprises International Inc., Britt Geertruida Dekker.

Directive 2004/48/EC, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29.4.2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, OJ L 157, 30.4.2004, p. 45–86. On the enforcement of copyright and the possibility of an injunction against a wi-fi network see the very recent ECJ Case C-484/14 Tobias Mc Fadden v Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH.

Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13.12.2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA, OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1–14.

See, on the contrary, the argument that “…in a world without fences we do not need gates…”, supported by Bowrey K., Law and Internet Cultures, Cambridge University Press, 2005, p. 101.

See a proposal for active participation and prevention on behalf of intermediaries in de Beer & Clemmer (2009), 375.

For the efforts of international organizations to create and international custom in relation to the Internet see Polanski P., Customary Law of the Internet, in the search for Supranational Cyberspace Law, 2007. See also COM (2007) 836, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on creative content online in the Single Market.

See the attitude of different jurisdictions regarding human rights protection in Stalla-Bourdillon (2010), 492.

See indicatively ECJ cases C-236/08 Google France v Louis Vuitton Malletier, C-324/09 L’Oréal v eBay, C-70/10 Scarlet v SABAM, C-360/10 SABAM v Netlog.

Productores de Música de España (Promusicae) v Telefónica de España SAU (Case C-275/06), for comments see Brimsted & Chesney (2008), 275 and Coudert & Werkers (2008), 57.

C-557/07 LSG – Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung von Leistungsschutzrechten GmbH v Te2 Telecommunication GmbH. Finally, the Supreme Austrian Court has dismissed the claim to disclose ‘traffic data’ see Decision OGH of 14-7-2009, 4 Ob 41/09x, LSG v. Tele2.

C-70/2010 Scarelt Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM), of 24-11-2011.

Section 512, Title 17, US Code. For a comparative study between EU and US see Ahlert, Marsden & Yung (2004), available at pcmlp.socleg.oxx.ac.uk

See for example the recent Harmful Digital Communications Act (2013) in New Zealand, which has introduced a formal N&TD procedure for defamatory content. For proposals to introduce a similar system for cyberbullying see Areheart (2007), 41. For sexual harassment see Bartow (2009), 383; for safekeeping trade secrets see Rowe (2008).

e.g. in Australia according to the Australian Broadcasting Services Act (1992) notices must be sent to Australian Communications and Media authority (ACMA) see Kleinschmidt (2010), 351.

see Edwards (2005).

In 2008 only, IWF has examined 33.947 complaints of which 80 % concerned sexual exploitation of minors. IWF has come across 1.536 websites of which 99 % were based outside the UK see Reed (2010), 927.

See on that Mifsud Bonnici (2008), 45 and Mifsud Bonnici & de Vey Mestdagh (2005), 133, admitting certain controversies of EU self-regulatory initiatives.

For a similar clause in the Facebook terms and conditions assimilating world-wide users with the citizens of USA, see Solove (2011), 146.

For the myths surrounding self-regulation see Burkert (2006), 245.

See for example in Belgium the Model Code of Conduct Governing On-line Commercial Communications (adopted by the ‘Federation des Experts Comptables Europeens’ (FEE), available at www.fee.be

For example, in the US, the Child Internet Protection Act does not impose the use of filters. However, libraries not using the filters are not entitled to state funding. See the relevant decision United States v American Libray Association (539 US 194, 2003) in Stomberg D., United States v. American Library Association Inc.: The Internet as an inherently Public Forum, Jurimetrics, 45, 2004, 59.

For calculating such cost see Schruers (2002), 205.

For a comparison of different systems see Stol W. (2009), 251. In the Netherlands a filtering method has been imposed for child pornography.

See the initiatives in 2012–2013 by Microsoft, Google and other major Internet players.

For the important role of payment providers see MacCarthy (2010), 1037.

Goldsmith & Wu (2006), 68.

See for example Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC, OJ L 127, 29.4.2014, p. 1–38 [the Tobacco Products Directive].

See an early decision of the Greek Supreme Court (Areios Pagos no. 9/2002) that has awarded compensation to the parents of a minor against the proprietor of a shop with electronic games who had allowed entrance to the minor.

For the sociological aspects of imposing such duty of care in the financial sector see Hamdani (2003), 53.

see Hay & Spier (2005), 1700.

See the Council of Europe 2008 Conference ‘Cooperation against Cybercrime’, having as a main theme the cooperation of police authorities with intermediaries (proceedings available at www.coe.int). Of the same view see Kioupis (2010), 247.

Of the same opinion see Cohen-Almagor (2010), 381. For an opposite opinion see Nelson (2010), 403, who proposes to control the basic infrastructure i.e payment systems rather than the providers. The same idea has been proposed in Germany in order to control illegal online gambling by cutting the umbilical cord between the ‘basisinfrastruktur’ and the provider see Steegmann (2010) and earlier Fox (2003), 187.

Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, CETS. No. 185, Budapest, 23.11.2001.

For legislative proposals to combat racism and hate speech see Reed (2010), 79 and Brennan (2009), 123.

It is inconceivable to imagine other networks without the provision of the basic service i.e. a power network without electricity or a water network without water. Therefore, providers must duly supply the envisaged service.

For the introduction of a possible ‘duty of help’ burdening the intermediaries, as well as the moral dimensions of their liability see Grodzinsky & Tavani (2002).

Kerr (2001), 457.

See First Report, COM(2003)702, op. cit.

See the initial text of the famous Amendment 138 of the Telecoms Package as voted by the European Parliament in the 1^st reading (24.9.2008): “…applying the principle that no restriction may be imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end-users, without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, notably in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on freedom of expression and information, save when public security is threatened in which case the ruling may be subsequent…”.

Te so called ‘Freedom Provision’ in the 3rd reading of above Amendement 138 (4.11.2009).

See a similar reference to art. 10 ECHR in Internet Recommendation CM/Rec (2008) 6, 26.3.2008 on measures to promote the respect for freedom of expression and information with regard to Internet filters, according to which users may object the use of filters. See also CoE document: Human rights guidelines for Internet Service Providers, H/Inf (2008) 9, available at www.coe.int

Yannopoulos (2013a), 459 and Yannopoulos (2016), 136.

With the exception of the recent ECJ Decision in the Joined Cases C-293/12 Digital Rights Ireland and C-594/12 Kärntner Landesregierung, cancelling Directive 2006/24/EC (the Data Retention Directive).

See the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (arts 179–180) aiming to promote the development and dissemination of new technologies, the UN initiative for World Summits on the Information Society (www.itu.int), and McKenna A., A Human Right to Participate in the Information Society, Hampton Press, 2011.

See Dalal (2011), 1017.

For an overview of the initial technical choices see Zittrain (2003), 32.

See for example the recent Harmful Digital Communications Act (2013) in New Zealand, which has introduced a formal N&TD procedure for defamatory content.

(Loi n° 2009-1311 du 28 octobre 2009 relative à la protection pénale de la propriété littéraire et artistique sur internet. The Haute Autorité pour la Diffusion des Œuvres et La Protection des Droits sur Internet (HADOPI), is the French authority responisble for the implementation of the law.

For example, in Greece the lack of trust is the second most significant reason for not conducting on-line purchases (by 25 %), the first reason being the lack of credit card, while the third (by 16 %) is the fear concerning the treatment of personal data. See the relevant research of the Athens University of Economics and Business concerning the behaviour of Greek on-line consumers, available at: www.eltrun.gr

See Dworkin’s landmark phrase : “…Law’s empire is defined by attitude, not territory or power or process…”, Dworkin (1986), 413.

Ahlert, C., Marsden, C., & Yung, C. (2004). How ‘Liberty’ disappeared from cyberspace: The mystery shopper tests internet content self-regulation. Available at pcmlp.socleg.oxx.ac.uk

Ann, B. (2009). Internet defamation as profit center: The monetization of online harassment, Harvard Journal of Law & Gender, Summer, 32, 383.

Areheart, B. A. (2007). Regulating cyberbullies through notice-based liability. The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part, 117, 41.

Brennan, F. (2009). Legislating against internet race hate. Information and Communications Technology Law, 18(2), 123.CrossRef

Brimsted, K., & Chesney, G. (2008). The ECJ’s judgment in Promusicae: The unintended consequences – music to the ears of copyright owners or a privacy headache for the future? A comment. Computer Law and Security Report, 24, 275.CrossRef

Burkert, H. (2006). Four myths about regulating in the Information Society. In B.-J. Koops et al. (Eds.), Starting points for ICT regulation, Asser Press, 245.

Cohen-Almagor, R. (2010). Responsibility of and trust in ISPs. Knowledge, Technology and Policy, 23, 381.CrossRef

Coudert, F., & Werkers, E. (2008). In the aftermath of the promusicae case: How to strike the balance? International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 18(1), 57.

Dalal, A. (2011). Protecting hyperlinks and preserving first amendment values on the internet. The University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 13, 1017.

De Beer, J., & Clemmer, C. D. (2009). Global trends in online copyright enforcement: A non-neutral role for network intermediaries? Jurimetrics Journal, 49, 375.

Dworkin, R. (1986). Law’s empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Edwards, L. (2005). Articles 12–15 ECD: ISP liability. In L. Edwards (Ed.), The new legal framework for E-Commerce in Europe.

Fox, M. (2003). Controlling unlawful Internet gambling through the prohibition of bank instruments. International Company and Commercial Law Review, 14(5), 187.

Goldsmith, J., & Wu, T. (2006). Who controls the internet, illusions of a borderless world. New York: Oxford University Press.

Grodzinsky, F. S., & Tavani, H. T. (2002). Cyberstalking: Moral responsibility, and legal liability issues for internet services providers, in proceedings IEEE 2002 social implications of information and communication technology, International Symposium on Technology and Society, ISTAS.

Hamdani, A. (2003). Gatekeeper liability. Southern California Law Review, 77, 53.

Hay, B., & Spier, K. (2005). Manufacturer liability for harms caused by consumers. American Economic Review, 95(5), 1700.CrossRef

Kerr, I. (2001). The legal relationship between online service providers and users. Canadian Business Law Journal, 35, 457.

Kioupis, D. (2010). Criminal liability on the internet. In I. Stamatoudi (Ed.), Copyright enforcement and the internet, information law series, 247.

Kleinschmidt, B. (2010). An international comparison of ISP’s liabilities for unlawful third party content. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 18(4), 351.CrossRef

MacCarthy, M. (2010). What Payment intermediaries are doing about Online Liability and why it matters. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 25, 1037.

McKenna, A. (2011). A human right to participate in the information society. Poquoson: Hampton Press.

Mifsud Bonnici, G. P. (2008). Self-regulation in cyberspace, Information technology and Law Series. The Hague: Asser Press.

Mifsud Bonnici, G. P., & de Vey Mestdagh, C. N. J. (2005). Right vision, wrong expectations: The european union and self-regulation of harmful internet content. Information and Communication Technology Law, 14(2), 133

Nelson, M. (2010). A response to responsibility of and trust in ISPs, by Raphael Cohen-Almagor. Knowledge, Technology and Policy, 23, 403.CrossRef

Reed, C. (2009). The challenge of hate speech online. Information and Communications Technology Law, 18(2), 79.CrossRef

Reed, C. (2010). How to make bad law: Lessons from Cyberspace. The Modern Law Review, 73(6), 903.CrossRef

Rowe, E. (2008). Proposing a mechanism for removing trade secrets from the internet. Journal of Internet Law, 3.

Schmoll, A. (2001). Die deliktische haftung der Internet-Service-Provider. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Schruers, M. (2002, March). The history and economics of ISP liability for third party content. Virginia Law Review, 88, 205.CrossRef

Solove, D. (2011). Nothing to hide, the false tradeoff between privacy and security (p. 146). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Stalla-Bourdillon, S. (2010). The flip side οf ISP’s liability regimes: The ambiguous protection of fundamental rights and liberties in private digital spaces. Computer Law and Security Report, 26, 492.CrossRef

Steegmann, M. (2010). Die Haftung der Basisinfrastruktur bei rechtswidrigen Internetangeboten: Verantwortlichkeit von Internet- und Finanzdienstleistern im Rahmen des illegalen Online-Glücksspiel s, Nomos Verlag.

Stol, W., et al. (2009). Governmental filtering of websites: The Dutch case. Computer Law and Security Report, 25(3), 251.CrossRef

Stomberg, D. (2004). United States v. American Library Association Inc.: The internet as an inherently public forum. Jurimetrics, 45, 59

Ufer, F. (2007). Die Haftung der internet provider nach dem Telemediengesetz. Hamburg: Recht der Neuen Medien.

Yannopoulos, G. N. (2013a). Comment on ECHR decision Delfi v. Estonia. Media & Communications Law (DIMEE), 4, 459 [in Greek].

Yannopoulos, G. N. (2013b). The Liability of Internet intermediaries [in Greek]. Athens: Nomiki Vivliothiki.

Yannopoulos, G. N. (2014). Secondary liability of service providers, report for Greece. Revue Hellénique de Droit International, 1, 787.

Yannopoulos, G. N. (2016). Comment on ECHR Decisions Delfi v. Estonia (Grand Chamber) and MTE and Index.HU v Hungary. Media & Communications Law (DIMEE), 1, 136 [in Greek].

Zittrain, J. (2003). Internet points of control. Boston College Law Review, 43, 32.

Title: The Immunity of Internet Intermediaries Reconsidered?
Author: Georgios N. Yannopoulos
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: The Responsibilities of Online Service Providers
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-47851-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-47852-4

Copyright Year: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47852-4_3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"