- The atonement of an alt-right troll 3 Years Ago
- #StopTheBans protests draw thousands across the country in support of abortion rights Today 9:24 AM
- North Korea is using Trump’s low IQ attack on Joe Biden Today 9:14 AM
- How to watch ‘Kidding’ for free Today 8:00 AM
- What’s the deal with Bran Stark at the end of ‘Game of Thrones’? Today 6:30 AM
- How to watch TruTV online for free Today 6:00 AM
- Fans call out Madonna for edited Eurovision video Tuesday 9:36 PM
- Partnered Twitch streamer temporarily banned for airing troll’s racist message Tuesday 8:45 PM
- Reddit theory says fans are wrong about who won ‘Game of Thrones’ Tuesday 6:52 PM
- Elon Musk hires ‘absolute unit’ sheep meme creator to be Tesla’s social media manager Tuesday 6:12 PM
- Jason Momoa stands by his Khaleesi after the ‘Game of Thrones’ finale Tuesday 4:05 PM
- Airbnb, 23andMe partner for creepy heritage travel recommendations Tuesday 3:26 PM
- Rep. Katie Porter goes viral again for trouncing Ben Carson (updated) Tuesday 3:26 PM
- This deepfake takes Bill Hader’s Schwarzenegger impression to the next level Tuesday 2:58 PM
- Wanda Sykes rails against Trump and offers much-needed perspective in ‘Not Normal’ Tuesday 2:41 PM
You can’t force a European website to delete a comment just because it hurts your feelings.
The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday ruled that news organizations aren’t liable for disparaging remarks left in their stories’ comment sections.
After commenters on the Hungarian news site Index.hu savaged a real estate company, the company sued the site and won in a Hungarian court. But the ECHR, which is the final arbiter of issues including free speech and expression in Europe, overturned that ruling. It agreed with lawyers for the news site and a local self-regulatory body that forcing the deletion of offensive comments trampled on both organizations’ free-speech rights.
The high court determined that, by punishing Index.hu and the Budapest self-regulatory group Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete, the national court in Budapest had violated Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
“It is true that, in cases where third-party user comments take the form of hate speech and direct threats to the physical integrity of individuals, the rights and interests of others and of the society as a whole might entitle Contracting States to impose liability on Internet news portals if they failed to take measures to remove clearly unlawful comments without delay,” the ECHR said in its ruling. “However, the present case did not involve such utterances.”
In addition, the court found, the Hungarian court system’s “rigid … notion of liability” for Internet comments “effectively precludes the balancing between the competing rights according to the criteria laid down in the Court’s case law.”
Websites hosted in Europe, like those based in the United States, are protected from legal retribution over their users’ defamatory Internet comments as long as they delete such comments when notified of them. This “notice-and-takedown system”—known in the U.S. as the “safe harbor” exemption to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act—generally shields Internet companies from being punished for the behavior of their users.
The ECHR held that a similar system in place in Hungary offered “a viable avenue to protect the commercial reputation of the plaintiff,” rendering the real estate company’s lawsuit unnecessarily punitive.
H/T The Guardian | Illustration via Max Fleishman
Eric Geller is a politics reporter who focuses on cybersecurity, surveillance, encryption, and privacy. A former staff writer at the Daily Dot, Geller joined Politico in June 2016, where he's focused on policymaking at the White House, the Justice Department, the State Department, and the Commerce Department.