Document Actions

Citation and metadata

Recommended citation

Patrick Leerssen, Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU, 6 (2015) JIPITEC 99 para 1.

Download Citation

Endnote

%0 Journal Article
%T Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU
%A Leerssen, Patrick
%J JIPITEC
%D 2015
%V 6
%N 2
%@ 2190-3387
%F leerssen2015
%X This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles
%L 340
%K Banning
%K Private Censorship
%K Removal Orders
%K Social Media
%U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-42717
%P 99-119

Download

Bibtex

@Article{leerssen2015,
  author = 	"Leerssen, Patrick",
  title = 	"Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU",
  journal = 	"JIPITEC",
  year = 	"2015",
  volume = 	"6",
  number = 	"2",
  pages = 	"99--119",
  keywords = 	"Banning; Private Censorship; Removal Orders; Social Media",
  abstract = 	"This article examines social network users' legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this `fair balance' test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles",
  issn = 	"2190-3387",
  url = 	"http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-42717"
}

Download

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Leerssen, Patrick
PY  - 2015
DA  - 2015//
TI  - Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU
JO  - JIPITEC
SP  - 99
EP  - 119
VL  - 6
IS  - 2
KW  - Banning
KW  - Private Censorship
KW  - Removal Orders
KW  - Social Media
AB  - This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles
SN  - 2190-3387
UR  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-42717
ID  - leerssen2015
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>leerssen2015</b:Tag>
<b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType>
<b:Year>2015</b:Year>
<b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle>
<b:Volume>6</b:Volume>
<b:Issue>2</b:Issue>
<b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-42717</b:Url>
<b:Pages>99-119</b:Pages>
<b:Author>
<b:Author><b:NameList>
<b:Person><b:Last>Leerssen</b:Last><b:First>Patrick</b:First></b:Person>
</b:NameList></b:Author>
</b:Author>
<b:Title>Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU</b:Title>
<b:Comments>This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles</b:Comments>
</b:Source>
</b:Sources>
Download

ISI

PT Journal
AU Leerssen, P
TI Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU
SO JIPITEC
PY 2015
BP 99
EP 119
VL 6
IS 2
DE Banning; Private Censorship; Removal Orders; Social Media
AB This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles
ER

Download

Mods

<mods>
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Cut Out By The Middle Man: The Free Speech Implications Of Social Network Blocking and Banning In The EU</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart type="family">Leerssen</namePart>
    <namePart type="given">Patrick</namePart>
  </name>
  <abstract>This article examines social network users’ legal defences against content removal under the EU and ECHR frameworks, and their implications for the effective exercise of free speech online. A review of the Terms of Use and content moderation policies of two major social network services, Facebook and Twitter, shows that end users are unlikely to have a contractual defence against content removal. Under the EU and ECHR frameworks, they may demand the observance of free speech principles in state-issued blocking orders and their implementation by intermediaries, but cannot invoke this ‘fair balance’ test against the voluntary removal decisions by the social network service. Drawing on practical examples, this article explores the threat to free speech created by this lack of accountability: Firstly, a shift from legislative regulation and formal injunctions to public-private collaborations allows state authorities to influence these ostensibly voluntary policies, thereby circumventing constitutional safeguards. Secondly, even absent state interference, the commercial incentives of social media cannot be guaranteed to coincide with democratic ideals. In light of the blurring of public and private functions in the regulation of social media expression, this article calls for the increased accountability of the social media services towards end users regarding the observance of free speech principles</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>Banning</topic>
    <topic>Private Censorship</topic>
    <topic>Removal Orders</topic>
    <topic>Social Media</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>6</number>
      </detail>
      <detail type="issue">
        <number>2</number>
      </detail>
      <date>2015</date>
      <extent unit="page">
        <start>99</start>
        <end>119</end>
      </extent>
    </part>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
  <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-42717</identifier>
  <identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-42717</identifier>
  <identifier type="citekey">leerssen2015</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