07 Juli 2023
Competition law as a powerful tool for effective enforcement of the GDPR
It looks like a good week for data protection. On Tuesday, the Commission presented a new proposal for a Regulation on additional procedural rules for the GDPR, and a few hours later, the ECJ published its decision C-252/21 on Meta Platforms v Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office). While the Commission's proposal to improve enforcement in cross-border cases should probably be taken with a pinch of salt, the ECJ ruled on some things with remarkable clarity. The first reactions to the ruling were quite surprising; few had expected the ECJ to take such a clear stance against Meta's targeted advertising business model. It does however represent a consistent interpretation of the GDPR in the tradition and understanding of power-limiting data protection. Continue reading >>
0 
25 Mai 2023
Strong on Hate Speech, Too Strict on Political Debate
Online hate speech is a topic that has gained importance in recent years. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) made an important ruling in this context on 15 May 2023 in Sanchez v. France. From a democratic theory and individual rights’ perspective, I would endorse the first decision because it tackles the so-called “silencing” and “desensitization effect” of hate speech. The second decision, however, runs the risk of adversely affecting free political debate, especially when individual politicians are called upon to delete comments by third parties. Continue reading >>
0
04 Februar 2023
„Marg bar Khamenei“
The Oversight Board has evaluated the use of a protest slogan used by Iranian dissidents, calling for "marg bar Khamenei", which literally translates as "death to Khamenei", yet is often used to mean "down with Khamenei". Meta removed it for violating its community standards against violence and incitement. At EU level, Art. 14(4) DSA provides for an unprecedented obligation, which requires social media platforms to act in a proportionate manner in applying and enforcing their terms and conditions, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved. Examining the Oversight Board's reasoning, we explore how Art. 14(4) DSA would be operationalized in this case. Continue reading >>
0
23 Januar 2023
Google zähmen
Das Bundeskartellamt versucht sich an der Zähmung des Datenkraken Google und zeigt, dass es trotz europäischer Regulierung weiterhin eine Vorreiterrolle im Kampf gegen die großen Digitalunternehmen einnehmen wird. Auf Grundlage des bisher kaum erprobten § 19a Abs. 2 GWB sollen Alphabet und Google Verbraucher*innen mehr Wahlmöglichkeiten bei der Einwilligung in das „Superprofiling“ geben. Damit zielt das Bundeskartellamt in das Herz des Geschäftsmodells der digitalen Giganten. Ob das gelingt, hängt maßgeblich davon ab, ob der für diesen Zweck geschaffene § 19a GWB in der Anwendung schlagkräftiger ist als das „alte“ Kartellrecht. Continue reading >>
0
15 Dezember 2022
Articulating Legitimacy through Policy Recommendations
On 6 December, Meta's Oversight Board issued a policy advisory opinion on 'cross-check', a content moderation system used by the company to avoid the erroneous removal of content shared by highly influential users on its platforms. Despite the opinion’s directness in calling Meta out for the disproportionate attention paid to corporate interests to the detriment of its human rights commitments, the OB’s decision presents an underlying duplicity, as it criticises policy and design choices replicated in the OB’s own architecture. This curtails the institution's capacity to enhance accountability and legitimacy. Continue reading >>
0
10 November 2022
Twitter Complaint Hotline Operator
Elon Musk, Twitter’s conspicuous new owner, famously spoke out against Trump's deplatforming, raising concerns that he could undo it upon gaining control of the social media platform. Mr. Musk was quick to dispel these fears. He first reassured advertisers that he has no plans to relax content moderation standards. In addition, he announced that the reactivation of banned accounts is s Anyone feeling a sense of déjà vu? Continue reading >>02 August 2022
Inkonsequenz made in Luxemburg
In diesem Dezember jährt sich die Gründung des Europäischen Gerichtshofes zum 70. Mal. Der EuGH zelebriert diesen runden Geburtstag bereits mit dem Hashtag #CJEUin70days auf dem sozialen Netzwerk Twitter. Nicht nur diese Kampagne, sondern auch die Öffentlichkeitsarbeit des EuGHs über soziale Medien insgesamt scheint dabei nicht im Einklang zu stehen mit der eigenen Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs. Continue reading >>23 Juni 2022
Tackling Discrimination in Targeted Advertising
On 21 June Meta and the US Department for Housing and Urban Development released a legal settlement that will restrict Meta’s ability to offer those clients some of its core ad-targeting products. It resolves (for now) a long-running case over discriminatory targeting of housing adverts. Meta is now prohibited from using certain targeting tools in this context, and has promised new tools to ensure more representative targeting. This US lawsuit should be a wake-up call for European regulators, reminding them that taking systemic discrimination seriously requires proactive regulatory reform and enforcement. The relevant provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA) are largely symbolic. Continue reading >>
0
18 Mai 2022
GDPR Collective Litigation Against Facebook
The recent CJEU Case C-319/20, Meta Platforms Ireland provides insights on the interpretation of Article 80(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (GDPR), which regulates representative actions in the data protection field. The Court of Justice specified that actions protecting general interests fall under the scope of Article 80(2) GDPR, but leaves the task unmoved to reconcile this provision with the Directive on Representative Actions (DRA). Continue reading >>
0
02 Mai 2022
Wieviel Automatisierung verträgt die Meinungsfreiheit?
Mit seinem Urteil über die grundrechtliche Bewertung des umstrittenen Artikel 17 der EU-Urheberrechtsrichtlinie (Rechtssache C-401/19) definiert der Europäische Gerichtshof enge Schranken für den Einsatz von Filtersystemen zur automatischen Sperrung mutmaßlich illegaler Inhalte. Das Urteil ist weit über das Urheberrecht hinaus von Bedeutung, da es den Sinngehalt des Verbots allgemeiner Überwachungspflichten präzisiert. Dieses Verbot ist auch Gegenstand einer aktuellen gerichtlichen Auseinandersetzung zwischen Grünen-Politikerin Renate Künast und dem Meta-Konzern über die Frage, inwieweit Facebook dafür verantwortlich ist, gegen Falschzitate auf der Plattform vorzugehen. Continue reading >>
0