Document Actions

Citation and metadata

Recommended citation

Toygar Hasan Oruç, The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?, 13 (2022) JIPITEC 176 para 1.

Download Citation

Endnote

%0 Journal Article
%T The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?
%A Oruç, Toygar Hasan
%J JIPITEC
%D 2022
%V 13
%N 3
%@ 2190-3387
%F oruç2022
%X The absence of a uniform notion of general monitoring, introduced under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, leads to different interpretations of the scope and the role of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations by the EU legislators and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the Court of Justice of the European Union balances freedom of expression and information, right to privacy and protection of personal data and right to property on the same level of importance in determining the scope of general monitoring, this article shows that special protections attributed to the interests that are fundamental to human life and to our modern democracies under primary EU laws are ignored. Unfortunately, this further deepens the segregation in the different interpretations of general monitoring and creates an inconsistency among the recent EU legislations. The article notes that this inconsistency eventually causes a legal uncertainty for the video-sharing platforms regarding their content moderation practices and thus turning the prohibition into an empty shell. At the current stage, the article reveals the need for a clear distinction for VSPs between vertically applicable content moderation measures arising from content or sector specific regulations and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. However, for future regulation in the EU, it is suggested to find an alternative solution to online monitoring which can suppress the impact of online illegal activities without restricting fundamental rights of individuals.
%L 340
%K EU
%K filtermonitoring
%K intermediary
%K monitoring
%K online
%U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-55559
%P 176-199

Download

Bibtex

@Article{oruç2022,
  author = 	"Oru{\c{c}}, Toygar Hasan",
  title = 	"The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?",
  journal = 	"JIPITEC",
  year = 	"2022",
  volume = 	"13",
  number = 	"3",
  pages = 	"176--199",
  keywords = 	"EU; filtermonitoring; intermediary; monitoring; online",
  abstract = 	"The absence of a uniform notion of general monitoring, introduced under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, leads to different interpretations of the scope and the role of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations by the EU legislators and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the Court of Justice of the European Union balances freedom of expression and information, right to privacy and protection of personal data and right to property on the same level of importance in determining the scope of general monitoring, this article shows that special protections attributed to the interests that are fundamental to human life and to our modern democracies under primary EU laws are ignored. Unfortunately, this further deepens the segregation in the different interpretations of general monitoring and creates an inconsistency among the recent EU legislations. The article notes that this inconsistency eventually causes a legal uncertainty for the video-sharing platforms regarding their content moderation practices and thus turning the prohibition into an empty shell. At the current stage, the article reveals the need for a clear distinction for VSPs between vertically applicable content moderation measures arising from content or sector specific regulations and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. However, for future regulation in the EU, it is suggested to find an alternative solution to online monitoring which can suppress the impact of online illegal activities without restricting fundamental rights of individuals.",
  issn = 	"2190-3387",
  url = 	"http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-55559"
}

Download

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Oruç, Toygar Hasan
PY  - 2022
DA  - 2022//
TI  - The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?
JO  - JIPITEC
SP  - 176
EP  - 199
VL  - 13
IS  - 3
KW  - EU
KW  - filtermonitoring
KW  - intermediary
KW  - monitoring
KW  - online
AB  - The absence of a uniform notion of general monitoring, introduced under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, leads to different interpretations of the scope and the role of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations by the EU legislators and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the Court of Justice of the European Union balances freedom of expression and information, right to privacy and protection of personal data and right to property on the same level of importance in determining the scope of general monitoring, this article shows that special protections attributed to the interests that are fundamental to human life and to our modern democracies under primary EU laws are ignored. Unfortunately, this further deepens the segregation in the different interpretations of general monitoring and creates an inconsistency among the recent EU legislations. The article notes that this inconsistency eventually causes a legal uncertainty for the video-sharing platforms regarding their content moderation practices and thus turning the prohibition into an empty shell. At the current stage, the article reveals the need for a clear distinction for VSPs between vertically applicable content moderation measures arising from content or sector specific regulations and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. However, for future regulation in the EU, it is suggested to find an alternative solution to online monitoring which can suppress the impact of online illegal activities without restricting fundamental rights of individuals.
SN  - 2190-3387
UR  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-55559
ID  - oruç2022
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>oruç2022</b:Tag>
<b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType>
<b:Year>2022</b:Year>
<b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle>
<b:Volume>13</b:Volume>
<b:Issue>3</b:Issue>
<b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-55559</b:Url>
<b:Pages>176-199</b:Pages>
<b:Author>
<b:Author><b:NameList>
<b:Person><b:Last>Oruç</b:Last><b:First>Toygar Hasan</b:First></b:Person>
</b:NameList></b:Author>
</b:Author>
<b:Title>The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?</b:Title>
<b:Comments>The absence of a uniform notion of general monitoring, introduced under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, leads to different interpretations of the scope and the role of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations by the EU legislators and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the Court of Justice of the European Union balances freedom of expression and information, right to privacy and protection of personal data and right to property on the same level of importance in determining the scope of general monitoring, this article shows that special protections attributed to the interests that are fundamental to human life and to our modern democracies under primary EU laws are ignored. Unfortunately, this further deepens the segregation in the different interpretations of general monitoring and creates an inconsistency among the recent EU legislations. The article notes that this inconsistency eventually causes a legal uncertainty for the video-sharing platforms regarding their content moderation practices and thus turning the prohibition into an empty shell. At the current stage, the article reveals the need for a clear distinction for VSPs between vertically applicable content moderation measures arising from content or sector specific regulations and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. However, for future regulation in the EU, it is suggested to find an alternative solution to online monitoring which can suppress the impact of online illegal activities without restricting fundamental rights of individuals.</b:Comments>
</b:Source>
</b:Sources>
Download

ISI

PT Journal
AU Oruç, T
TI The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?
SO JIPITEC
PY 2022
BP 176
EP 199
VL 13
IS 3
DE EU; filtermonitoring; intermediary; monitoring; online
AB The absence of a uniform notion of general monitoring, introduced under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, leads to different interpretations of the scope and the role of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations by the EU legislators and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the Court of Justice of the European Union balances freedom of expression and information, right to privacy and protection of personal data and right to property on the same level of importance in determining the scope of general monitoring, this article shows that special protections attributed to the interests that are fundamental to human life and to our modern democracies under primary EU laws are ignored. Unfortunately, this further deepens the segregation in the different interpretations of general monitoring and creates an inconsistency among the recent EU legislations. The article notes that this inconsistency eventually causes a legal uncertainty for the video-sharing platforms regarding their content moderation practices and thus turning the prohibition into an empty shell. At the current stage, the article reveals the need for a clear distinction for VSPs between vertically applicable content moderation measures arising from content or sector specific regulations and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. However, for future regulation in the EU, it is suggested to find an alternative solution to online monitoring which can suppress the impact of online illegal activities without restricting fundamental rights of individuals.
ER

Download

Mods

<mods>
  <titleInfo>
    <title>The Prohibition of General Monitoring Obligation for Video-Sharing Platforms under Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive in light of Recent Developments: Is it still necessary to maintain it?</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart type="family">Oruç</namePart>
    <namePart type="given">Toygar Hasan</namePart>
  </name>
  <abstract>The absence of a uniform notion of general monitoring, introduced under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, leads to different interpretations of the scope and the role of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations by the EU legislators and by the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the Court of Justice of the European Union balances freedom of expression and information, right to privacy and protection of personal data and right to property on the same level of importance in determining the scope of general monitoring, this article shows that special protections attributed to the interests that are fundamental to human life and to our modern democracies under primary EU laws are ignored. Unfortunately, this further deepens the segregation in the different interpretations of general monitoring and creates an inconsistency among the recent EU legislations. The article notes that this inconsistency eventually causes a legal uncertainty for the video-sharing platforms regarding their content moderation practices and thus turning the prohibition into an empty shell. At the current stage, the article reveals the need for a clear distinction for VSPs between vertically applicable content moderation measures arising from content or sector specific regulations and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. However, for future regulation in the EU, it is suggested to find an alternative solution to online monitoring which can suppress the impact of online illegal activities without restricting fundamental rights of individuals.</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>EU</topic>
    <topic>filtermonitoring</topic>
    <topic>intermediary</topic>
    <topic>monitoring</topic>
    <topic>online</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>13</number>
      </detail>
      <detail type="issue">
        <number>3</number>
      </detail>
      <date>2022</date>
      <extent unit="page">
        <start>176</start>
        <end>199</end>
      </extent>
    </part>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
  <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-55559</identifier>
  <identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-55559</identifier>
  <identifier type="citekey">oruç2022</identifier>
</mods>
Download

Full Metadata

JIPITEC – Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law
Article search
Extended article search
Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter
Follow Us
twitter
 
Navigation