Quinta's weblog in english

News from the Prosecutor's office in the Google-Vividown case

Caso Google, la replica della Procura | L'espresso.

• Information on the case was partial; Google required that journalists were not allowed to the trial
• Thre was a takedown request on Nov. 5th which was ignored

ACTA and editorial responsibility: EU and US views

I wrote in a  comment to a news envolving an italian art critic turned tv star turned politician (Mr. Sgarbi) and Youtube that in the US and EU we have different views about editorial responsibility.

US view stems from an interpretation by the supreme court re. the Communications Decency Act, section 230, saying that operators of Internet services are not to be construed as publishers (and thus not legally liable for the words of third parties who use their services). They could even slightly alter the content, without changing the meaning, without incurring in liabilities.

In the EU, in order to not incur in liability (eCommerce Directive), the operator must not modify the content, limiting its action to transporting it (mere conduit), hosting it or caching it.

This same point of view appears also in leaked document for negotiators of the ill-omened ACTA treaty.

In the text, one can find  are some liability-mitigation provisions for the providers of internet services as follows.

The US view: "the action of the provider's users that are not directed or initiated  by that provider and when provider does not select the material"

The EU view: "the action of the provider's users that are not modified by that provider and when the provider does not select the material"