![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper critically assesses the compatibility of content recognition and filtering technology or so-called notice and staydown approach with the right of social network platforms and users to a fair trial, privacy and freedom of expression under Articles 6, 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (1950) (ECHR). The analysis draws on Article 13 of the European Commission’s proposal for a Directive on Copyright, the case-law of the Strasbourg and Luxembourg Court and academic literature. It argues that the adoption of content recognition and filtering technology could pose a threat to social network platforms and user human rights. It considers the compliance of ‘notice and staydown’ with the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) three-part, non-cumulative test, to determine whether a ‘notice and staydown’ approach is, firstly, ‘in accordance with the law’, secondly, pursues one or more legitimate aims included in Article 8(2) and 10(2) ECHR and thirdly, is ‘necessary’ and ‘proportionate’. It concludes that ‘notice and staydown’ could infringe part one and part three of the ECtHR test as well as the ECtHR principle of equality of arms, thereby violating the rights of social network platforms and users under Articles 6, 8 and 10 of the Convention.
KEYWORDS:
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to my mentor and friend Stephen M. Baker for his help and support throughout all these years.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 [51].
2 Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [53].
3 Case 484/14 Tobias Mc Fadden v Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH [2016] [87].
4 Sidabras and Dziautas v Lithuania App nos 55480/00 and 59330/00 (ECtHR, 24 July 2004) [43].
5 Bigaeva v Greece App no 26713/05 (ECtHR, 2009) [22]–[28].
6 Copland v the United Kingdom (App no 62617/00) (2007) 45 EHRR 37 [41].
7 Copland v the United Kingdom (App no 62617/00) (2007) 45 EHRR 37 [41].
8 Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [50]; Guerra and others v Italy (1998) 26 EHRR 357 [53]; Observer and Guardian v the United Kingdom (1992) 14 EHRR 153 [59].
9 Öztürk v Turkey App no 22479/93 (ECtHR, 28 September 1999) [49]; Autronic AG v Switzerland (1990) 12 EHRR 485 [47].
10 Öztürk v Turkey App no 22479/93 (ECtHR, 28 September 1999) [49]; Autronic AG v Switzerland (1990) 12 EHRR 485 [47].
11 Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [110]–[118]; Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [48]; partly Dissenting Opinion of Judge Pinto de Albuquerque in Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 12 January 2016) [3].
12 Times Newspapers Ltd (nos 1 and 2) v the United Kingdom App nos 3002/03 and 23676/03 (ECtHR, 10 June 2009) [27].
13 Partly Dissenting Opinion of Judge Pinto de Albuquerque in Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 12 January 2016) [3].
14 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [109].
15 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [109].
16 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [109], [110].
17 AG's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 4].
18 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 12 January 2016) [112].
19 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 29]–[AG 30].
20 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 89].
21 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 90].
22 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 90].
23 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 31].
24 Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsenk [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) [AG 76].
25 Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsenk [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) [AG 80].
26 Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsenk [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) [AG 142].
27 Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12 Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and others [2014] WLR (D) 164.
28 Legal opinion by the Legal Service of the European Parliament (confidential legal opinion 22 December 2014) 9 – with special thanks to Dr Sonia Morano-Foadi.
29 Kennedy v the United Kingdom App no 26839/05 (2010) 52 EHRR [151]; Rotaru v Romania App no 28341/95 (2000) 8 BHRC 449 [52]; Liberty and others v the United Kingdom App no 58243/00 (2008) 48 EHRR 1 [59]; Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [57]; Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [120]–[122].
30 Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) see for instance [65].
31 Kennedy v the United Kingdom App no 26839/05 (2010) 52 EHRR [151]; Liberty and others v the United Kingdom App no 58243/00 (2008) 48 EHRR 1 [59]; Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [57].
32 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 46].
33 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 52].
34 Kennedy v the United Kingdom App no 26839/05 (2010) 52 EHRR [151]; Liberty and others v the United Kingdom App no 58243/00 (2008) 48 EHRR 1 [59]; Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [57].
35 Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [59]; see also Concurring Opinion in Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013), 27–28; Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 see final holding; see also Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 53]–[AG 59].
36 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [140]–[141]; see also Concurring Opinion in Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) page 28.
37 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [110]; Rotaru v Romania App no 28341/95 (2000) 8 BHRC 449 [59]; see also Klass and others v Germany App no 5029/71 (1979–1980) 2 EHRR 214 [55]; Amann v Switzerland App no 27798/95 (2000) 30 EHRR 843 [60].
38 Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsenk [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) [123].
39 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 275/06 Productores de Musica de Espana (Promusicae) v Telefonica de Espana SAU [2008] ECR I-271 [AG 121].
40 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [122].
41 Golder v the United Kingdom App no 4451/70 (1979) 1 EHRR 524 [44].
42 Neij and Sunde Kolmisoppi v Sweden App no 40397/12 (ECtHR, 19 February 2013).
43 Peck v the United Kingdom App no 44647/98 (2003) 36 EHRR 41 [76]; S and Marper v the United Kingdom App no 30562/04 and 30566/04 (2008) ECHR 1581 [101]; Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [78]; Khurshid Mustafa and Tarzibachi v Sweden App no 23883/06 (ECtHR, 16 March 2009) [42].
44 Peck v the United Kingdom App no 44647/98 (2003) 36 EHRR 41 [76]; S and Marper v the United Kingdom App no 30562/04 and 30566/04 (2008) ECHR 1581 [101]; Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [78]; Khurshid Mustafa and Tarzibachi v Sweden App no 23883/06 (ECtHR, 16 March 2009) [42].
45 S and Marper v the United Kingdom App no 30562/04 and 30566/04 (2008) ECHR 1581 [101]; Coster v the United Kingdom App no 24876/94 (2001) 33 EHRR 20 [104]; Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [78]; Khurshid Mustafa and Tarzibachi v Sweden App no 23883/06 (ECtHR, 16 March 2009) [43].
46 James and Others v the United Kingdom App no 8793/79 (ECtHR, 21 February 1986) [51]; see also Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [121]; Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) [64]; Uzun v Germany App no 35623/05 (2010) 53 EHRR 852 [78].
47 Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [159].
48 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 see final holding; see also Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 see final holding.
49 The fact that technical measures might be easily circumvented makes the necessity of these measures questionable see Concurring Opinion in Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) page 28.
50 C-314/12 UPC Telekabel Wien GmbH v Constantin FilmVerleih GmbH and Wega Filmproduktionsgesellschaft GmbH [2013] [62].
51 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [140]–[141]; Concurring Opinion in Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) page 29; see also Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [159].
52 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [AG footnote 31].
53 Yildirim v Turkey App no 3111/10 (ECtHR, 18 March 2013) page 29; C-314/12 UPC Telekabel Wien GmbH v Constantin FilmVerleih GmbH and Wega Filmproduktionsgesellschaft GmbH [2013] [56].
54 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [137]; Neij and Sunde Kolmisoppi v Sweden App no 40397/12 (ECtHR, 19 February 2013).
55 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 [33]–[34]; see also Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société´ belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [35]–[48].
56 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 [48]–[50]; see also Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société´ belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [51]–[53].
57 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 [51]; see also Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société´ belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [53]; and Case 484/14 Tobias Mc Fadden v Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH [2016] [87].
58 Benthem v the Netherlands (App no 8848/80) (1985) 8 EHRR 1 [32].
59 MS v Sweden (App no 20837/92) (1997) ECHR 49.
60 Benthem v The Netherlands App no 8848/80 (ECtHR 23 October 1985) [32].
61 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 [51]; see also Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [53]; and Case 484/14 Tobias Mc Fadden v Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH [2016] [87].
62 Baraona v Portugal App no 10092/82 (1987) ECHR 13 [44]; Zimmermann and Steiner v Switzerland App no 8737/79 (1983) 6 EHRR 17 [22].
63 Dombo Beheer BV v The Netherlands App no 14448/88 (1993) 18 EHRR 213 [33]; Ankerl v Switzerland App no 17748/91 (1996) ECHR 45 [38]; Bulut v Austria App no 17358/90 (1996) ECHR 10 [47]; Niderost-Huber v Switzerland App no 18990/91 (1997) ECHR [23].
64 Neumeister v Austria App no 1936/63 (1968) 1 EHRR 191 [22].
65 Dombo Beheer BV v The Netherlands App no 14448/88 (1993) 18 EHRR 213 [33].
66 Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15 Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsenk [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Dec) [121].
67 Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [133].
68 Pelladoah v the Netherlands App no 16737/90 (1994) 19 EHRR 81[34].
69 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [AG 106].
70 Case 360-10 Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV [2012] ECR I-0000 [50]; see also Case 70-10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2012] ECDR 4 [52].
71 Borgers v Belgium App no 12005/86 (1991) 15 EHRR 92 [29].
72 Advocate General's Opinion in Case 275/06 Productores de Musica de Espana (Promusicae) v Telefonica de Espana SAU [2008] ECR I-271 [AG 114].
73 Joint dissenting opinion of Judges Sajó and Tsotsoria in Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [2].
74 Joint dissenting opinion of Judges Sajó and Tsotsoria in Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [2].
75 Joint dissenting opinion of Judges Sajó and Tsotsoria in Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [35].
76 Joint dissenting opinion of Judges Sajó and Tsotsoria in Delfi v Estonia App no 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015) [36].
77 Joint Dissenting Opinion of Judges Raimondi, Dedov, Kjolbro, Mits, Mourou-Vikstrom and Eicke in Barbulescu v Romania App no 61496/08 (ECtHR, 5 September 2017) [9].