Document Actions
Citation and metadata
Recommended citation
Federica Casarosa, Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation, 14 (2023) JIPITEC 391 para 1.
Download Citation
Endnote
%0 Journal Article %T Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation %A Casarosa, Federica %J JIPITEC %D 2023 %V 14 %N 2023 %@ 2190-3387 %F casarosa2023 %X Content moderation is at the coreof online platform activities. Many platforms allowusers to post content that may or may not complywith the terms of service or that may violate nationallaws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex postand ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently)happen.In order to allow users to effectively contest decisionsand compel platforms to restore content or accountsafter erroneous decisions, online platforms shouldprovide adequate due process mechanisms to appealand seek redress. The EU has addressed this point byincluding specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms canalso be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies.After analysing the role of online platforms in contentmoderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA.Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria foreffective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability,independence and transparency and, on the otherhand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA. %L 340 %K Certification %K Content Moderation %K Digital Services %K Harmonisation %K Online Dispute Resolution %U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441 %P 391-NoneDownload
Bibtex
@Article{casarosa2023,
author = "Casarosa, Federica",
title = "Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation",
journal = "JIPITEC",
year = "2023",
volume = "14",
number = "2023",
pages = "391--None",
keywords = "Certification; Content Moderation; Digital Services; Harmonisation; Online Dispute Resolution",
abstract = "Content moderation is at the coreof online platform activities. Many platforms allowusers to post content that may or may not complywith the terms of service or that may violate nationallaws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex postand ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently)happen.In order to allow users to effectively contest decisionsand compel platforms to restore content or accountsafter erroneous decisions, online platforms shouldprovide adequate due process mechanisms to appealand seek redress. The EU has addressed this point byincluding specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms canalso be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies.After analysing the role of online platforms in contentmoderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA.Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria foreffective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability,independence and transparency and, on the otherhand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA.",
issn = "2190-3387",
url = "http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441"
}
Download
RIS
TY - JOUR AU - Casarosa, Federica PY - 2023 DA - 2023// TI - Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation JO - JIPITEC SP - 391 EP - None VL - 14 IS - 2023 KW - Certification KW - Content Moderation KW - Digital Services KW - Harmonisation KW - Online Dispute Resolution AB - Content moderation is at the coreof online platform activities. Many platforms allowusers to post content that may or may not complywith the terms of service or that may violate nationallaws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex postand ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently)happen.In order to allow users to effectively contest decisionsand compel platforms to restore content or accountsafter erroneous decisions, online platforms shouldprovide adequate due process mechanisms to appealand seek redress. The EU has addressed this point byincluding specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms canalso be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies.After analysing the role of online platforms in contentmoderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA.Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria foreffective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability,independence and transparency and, on the otherhand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA. SN - 2190-3387 UR - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441 ID - casarosa2023 ER -Download
Wordbib
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <b:Sources SelectedStyle="" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" > <b:Source> <b:Tag>casarosa2023</b:Tag> <b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType> <b:Year>2023</b:Year> <b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle> <b:Volume>14</b:Volume> <b:Issue>2023</b:Issue> <b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441</b:Url> <b:Pages>391-None</b:Pages> <b:Author> <b:Author><b:NameList> <b:Person><b:Last>Casarosa</b:Last><b:First>Federica</b:First></b:Person> </b:NameList></b:Author> </b:Author> <b:Title>Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation</b:Title> <b:Comments>Content moderation is at the coreof online platform activities. Many platforms allowusers to post content that may or may not complywith the terms of service or that may violate nationallaws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex postand ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently)happen.In order to allow users to effectively contest decisionsand compel platforms to restore content or accountsafter erroneous decisions, online platforms shouldprovide adequate due process mechanisms to appealand seek redress. The EU has addressed this point byincluding specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms canalso be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies.After analysing the role of online platforms in contentmoderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA.Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria foreffective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability,independence and transparency and, on the otherhand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA.</b:Comments> </b:Source> </b:Sources>Download
ISI
PT Journal AU Casarosa, F TI Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation SO JIPITEC PY 2023 BP 391 EP None VL 14 IS 2023 DE Certification; Content Moderation; Digital Services; Harmonisation; Online Dispute Resolution AB Content moderation is at the coreof online platform activities. Many platforms allowusers to post content that may or may not complywith the terms of service or that may violate nationallaws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex postand ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently)happen.In order to allow users to effectively contest decisionsand compel platforms to restore content or accountsafter erroneous decisions, online platforms shouldprovide adequate due process mechanisms to appealand seek redress. The EU has addressed this point byincluding specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms canalso be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies.After analysing the role of online platforms in contentmoderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA.Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria foreffective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability,independence and transparency and, on the otherhand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA. ERDownload
Mods
<mods>
<titleInfo>
<title>Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="family">Casarosa</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Federica</namePart>
</name>
<abstract>Content moderation is at the core
of online platform activities. Many platforms allow
users to post content that may or may not comply
with the terms of service or that may violate national
laws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex post
and ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently)
happen.
In order to allow users to effectively contest decisions
and compel platforms to restore content or accounts
after erroneous decisions, online platforms should
provide adequate due process mechanisms to appeal
and seek redress. The EU has addressed this point by
including specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms can
also be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies.
After analysing the role of online platforms in content
moderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA.
Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria for
effective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability,
independence and transparency and, on the other
hand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA.</abstract>
<subject>
<topic>Certification</topic>
<topic>Content Moderation</topic>
<topic>Digital Services</topic>
<topic>Harmonisation</topic>
<topic>Online Dispute Resolution</topic>
</subject>
<classification authority="ddc">340</classification>
<relatedItem type="host">
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<genre>academic journal</genre>
<titleInfo>
<title>JIPITEC</title>
</titleInfo>
<part>
<detail type="volume">
<number>14</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue">
<number>2023</number>
</detail>
<date>2023</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>391</start>
<end>None</end>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
<identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441</identifier>
<identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441</identifier>
<identifier type="citekey">casarosa2023</identifier>
</mods>
Download
Full Metadata
| Bibliographic Citation | Journal of intellectual property, information technology and electronic commerce law 14 (2023) 2023 |
|---|---|
| Title |
Out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms for failures in content moderation (eng) |
| Author | Federica Casarosa |
| Language | eng |
| Abstract | Content moderation is at the core of online platform activities. Many platforms allow users to post content that may or may not comply with the terms of service or that may violate national laws. In order to avoid these violations, online platforms have started to monitor content both ex post and ex ante. However, mistakes may still (frequently) happen. In order to allow users to effectively contest decisions and compel platforms to restore content or accounts after erroneous decisions, online platforms should provide adequate due process mechanisms to appeal and seek redress. The EU has addressed this point by including specific provisions in the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA). In particular, Article 21 provides that complaints against online platforms can also be resolved through out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms provided by certified bodies. After analysing the role of online platforms in content moderation, this essay focuses on the types of dispute resolution mechanisms envisaged in the DSA. Assessing, on the one hand, the proposed criteria for effective out-of-court dispute settlement bodies according to the principles of fairness, accountability, independence and transparency and, on the other hand, the shortcomings that emerge from the certification mechanism defined in the DSA. |
| Subject | Certification, Content Moderation, Digital Services, Harmonisation, Online Dispute Resolution |
| DDC | 340 |
| Rights | DPPL |
| URN: | urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58441 |
