Document Actions
Citation and metadata
Recommended citation
Pieter Wolters, Raphaël Gellert, Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA, 14 (2023) JIPITEC 403 para 1.
Download Citation
Endnote
%0 Journal Article %T Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA %A Wolters, Pieter %A Gellert, Raphaël %J JIPITEC %D 2023 %V 14 %N 2023 %@ 2190-3387 %F wolters2023 %X The adoption of the DSA will bringimportant changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, theDSA addresses many content moderation-relatedchallenges, and in so doing also affects the balancethat existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hostingservice providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance betweenthe various involved interests?As far as the economic interests of hosting serviceproviders are concerned, the harmonisation of themechanism should certainly be a welcome changefor economic operators. Further, even though theDSA contains many new procedural obligations, theyentail reasonable efforts.The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effectiveand user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims’ interests.However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity.Finally, the safeguards of content providers’ fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only throughthe creation of new redress mechanisms, but alsothrough the hosting provider services’ obligation toprovide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary,diligent and timely, and to justify them through astatement of reasons. Although the applicability ofthe safeguards is still too narrow in some respects,the new safeguards and their requirements shouldimprove the current situation in which hardly anybinding legal provisions exist.All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequatebalance, the DSA’s notice and action mechanismdoes represent a significant step forward for all theparties that have a stake in the moderation of online content. %L 340 %K Digital Services Act %K Freedom of Expression %K Illegal Content %K Notice-and-Action %K Online platforms %U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58451 %P 403-NoneDownload
Bibtex
@Article{wolters2023,
author = "Wolters, Pieter
and Gellert, Rapha{\"e}l",
title = "Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA",
journal = "JIPITEC",
year = "2023",
volume = "14",
number = "2023",
pages = "403--None",
keywords = "Digital Services Act; Freedom of Expression; Illegal Content; Notice-and-Action; Online platforms",
abstract = "The adoption of the DSA will bringimportant changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, theDSA addresses many content moderation-relatedchallenges, and in so doing also affects the balancethat existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hostingservice providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance betweenthe various involved interests?As far as the economic interests of hosting serviceproviders are concerned, the harmonisation of themechanism should certainly be a welcome changefor economic operators. Further, even though theDSA contains many new procedural obligations, theyentail reasonable efforts.The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effectiveand user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims' interests.However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity.Finally, the safeguards of content providers' fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only throughthe creation of new redress mechanisms, but alsothrough the hosting provider services' obligation toprovide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary,diligent and timely, and to justify them through astatement of reasons. Although the applicability ofthe safeguards is still too narrow in some respects,the new safeguards and their requirements shouldimprove the current situation in which hardly anybinding legal provisions exist.All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequatebalance, the DSA's notice and action mechanismdoes represent a significant step forward for all theparties that have a stake in the moderation of online content.",
issn = "2190-3387",
url = "http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58451"
}
Download
RIS
TY - JOUR AU - Wolters, Pieter AU - Gellert, Raphaël PY - 2023 DA - 2023// TI - Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA JO - JIPITEC SP - 403 EP - None VL - 14 IS - 2023 KW - Digital Services Act KW - Freedom of Expression KW - Illegal Content KW - Notice-and-Action KW - Online platforms AB - The adoption of the DSA will bringimportant changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, theDSA addresses many content moderation-relatedchallenges, and in so doing also affects the balancethat existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hostingservice providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance betweenthe various involved interests?As far as the economic interests of hosting serviceproviders are concerned, the harmonisation of themechanism should certainly be a welcome changefor economic operators. Further, even though theDSA contains many new procedural obligations, theyentail reasonable efforts.The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effectiveand user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims’ interests.However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity.Finally, the safeguards of content providers’ fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only throughthe creation of new redress mechanisms, but alsothrough the hosting provider services’ obligation toprovide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary,diligent and timely, and to justify them through astatement of reasons. Although the applicability ofthe safeguards is still too narrow in some respects,the new safeguards and their requirements shouldimprove the current situation in which hardly anybinding legal provisions exist.All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequatebalance, the DSA’s notice and action mechanismdoes represent a significant step forward for all theparties that have a stake in the moderation of online content. SN - 2190-3387 UR - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58451 ID - wolters2023 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>wolters2023</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:0009-29-58451</b:Url> <b:Pages>403-None</b:Pages> <b:Author> <b:Author><b:NameList> <b:Person><b:Last>Wolters</b:Last><b:First>Pieter</b:First></b:Person> <b:Person><b:Last>Gellert</b:Last><b:First>Raphaël</b:First></b:Person> </b:NameList></b:Author> </b:Author> <b:Title>Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA</b:Title> <b:Comments>The adoption of the DSA will bringimportant changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, theDSA addresses many content moderation-relatedchallenges, and in so doing also affects the balancethat existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hostingservice providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance betweenthe various involved interests?As far as the economic interests of hosting serviceproviders are concerned, the harmonisation of themechanism should certainly be a welcome changefor economic operators. Further, even though theDSA contains many new procedural obligations, theyentail reasonable efforts.The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effectiveand user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims’ interests.However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity.Finally, the safeguards of content providers’ fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only throughthe creation of new redress mechanisms, but alsothrough the hosting provider services’ obligation toprovide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary,diligent and timely, and to justify them through astatement of reasons. Although the applicability ofthe safeguards is still too narrow in some respects,the new safeguards and their requirements shouldimprove the current situation in which hardly anybinding legal provisions exist.All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequatebalance, the DSA’s notice and action mechanismdoes represent a significant step forward for all theparties that have a stake in the moderation of online content.</b:Comments> </b:Source> </b:Sources>Download
ISI
PT Journal AU Wolters, P Gellert, R TI Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA SO JIPITEC PY 2023 BP 403 EP None VL 14 IS 2023 DE Digital Services Act; Freedom of Expression; Illegal Content; Notice-and-Action; Online platforms AB The adoption of the DSA will bringimportant changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, theDSA addresses many content moderation-relatedchallenges, and in so doing also affects the balancethat existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hostingservice providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance betweenthe various involved interests?As far as the economic interests of hosting serviceproviders are concerned, the harmonisation of themechanism should certainly be a welcome changefor economic operators. Further, even though theDSA contains many new procedural obligations, theyentail reasonable efforts.The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effectiveand user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims’ interests.However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity.Finally, the safeguards of content providers’ fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only throughthe creation of new redress mechanisms, but alsothrough the hosting provider services’ obligation toprovide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary,diligent and timely, and to justify them through astatement of reasons. Although the applicability ofthe safeguards is still too narrow in some respects,the new safeguards and their requirements shouldimprove the current situation in which hardly anybinding legal provisions exist.All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequatebalance, the DSA’s notice and action mechanismdoes represent a significant step forward for all theparties that have a stake in the moderation of online content. ERDownload
Mods
<mods>
<titleInfo>
<title>Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="family">Wolters</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Pieter</namePart>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="family">Gellert</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Raphaël</namePart>
</name>
<abstract>The adoption of the DSA will bring
important changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, the
DSA addresses many content moderation-related
challenges, and in so doing also affects the balance
that existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hosting
service providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance between
the various involved interests?
As far as the economic interests of hosting service
providers are concerned, the harmonisation of the
mechanism should certainly be a welcome change
for economic operators. Further, even though the
DSA contains many new procedural obligations, they
entail reasonable efforts.
The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effective
and user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims’ interests.
However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity.
Finally, the safeguards of content providers’ fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only through
the creation of new redress mechanisms, but also
through the hosting provider services’ obligation to
provide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary,
diligent and timely, and to justify them through a
statement of reasons. Although the applicability of
the safeguards is still too narrow in some respects,
the new safeguards and their requirements should
improve the current situation in which hardly any
binding legal provisions exist.
All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequate
balance, the DSA’s notice and action mechanism
does represent a significant step forward for all the
parties that have a stake in the moderation of online content.</abstract>
<subject>
<topic>Digital Services Act</topic>
<topic>Freedom of Expression</topic>
<topic>Illegal Content</topic>
<topic>Notice-and-Action</topic>
<topic>Notice-and-action</topic>
<topic>Online platforms</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>403</start>
<end>None</end>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
<identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58451</identifier>
<identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58451</identifier>
<identifier type="citekey">wolters2023</identifier>
</mods>
Download
Full Metadata
| Bibliographic Citation | Journal of intellectual property, information technology and electronic commerce law 14 (2023) 2023 |
|---|---|
| Title |
Towards a better notice and action mechanism in the DSA (eng) |
| Author | Pieter Wolters, Raphaël Gellert |
| Language | eng |
| Abstract | The adoption of the DSA will bring important changes in the content moderation landscape in the EU. By harmonising, codifying, and further developing a notice and action mechanism, the DSA addresses many content moderation-related challenges, and in so doing also affects the balance that existed thus far between the protection of victims of illegal content, the safeguarding of fundamental rights and the economic interests of hosting service providers. This contribution answers the following question: Does the notice and action mechanism of the DSA create an adequate balance between the various involved interests? As far as the economic interests of hosting service providers are concerned, the harmonisation of the mechanism should certainly be a welcome change for economic operators. Further, even though the DSA contains many new procedural obligations, they entail reasonable efforts. The requirement of a harmonised, efficient, effective and user-friendly notification procedures should fix the existing limitations and can be seen as an important step for the protection of the victims’ interests. However, the lack of an obligation to provide a statement of reasons to notifiers is a missed opportunity. Finally, the safeguards of content providers’ fundamental rights are also enhanced. Not only through the creation of new redress mechanisms, but also through the hosting provider services’ obligation to provide decisions that are objective, non-arbitrary, diligent and timely, and to justify them through a statement of reasons. Although the applicability of the safeguards is still too narrow in some respects, the new safeguards and their requirements should improve the current situation in which hardly any binding legal provisions exist. All in all, even though it contains various shortcomings that prevent it from truly striking an adequate balance, the DSA’s notice and action mechanism does represent a significant step forward for all the parties that have a stake in the moderation of online content. |
| Subject | Digital Services Act, Freedom of Expression, Illegal Content, Notice-and-Action, Notice-and-action, Online platforms |
| DDC | 340 |
| Rights | DPPL |
| URN: | urn:nbn:de:0009-29-58451 |
