Top European Court To Consider If EU Countries Can Censor The Global Internet
from the it's-spreading... dept
Last month we wrote about the tragic and hugely problematic ruling in Canada that said a Canadian court could order global censorship of content it deems to be illegal. As lots of people pointed out, that is going to have dangerous consequences for speech around the world. If you accept that Canada can censor the global internet, what's to stop China, Iran or Russia from claiming the same rights?
And now we'll get to find out if the EU similarly believes in the ability of one country to demand global censorship online. In another case that we've been following, French data protection officials had been demanding Google censor content globally, and Google had been refusing. Now, the issue has been sent to the EU Court of Justice, the very same court who created this mess three years ago in saying that Google was subject to "right to be forgotten" claims. Google had reasonably interpreted the law to just apply in the EU (where the jurisdiction existed). But now the same court will decide if EU officials can censor globally.
One hopes that the sheer absurdity of the situation may lead the CJEU to start to recognize just how problematic its ruling was back in 2014, but somehow, that's unlikely. We'll certainly be paying attention to this case...
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: censorship, cjeu, eu, france, free speech, global censorship, jurisdiction, right to be forgotten, rtbf
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And it being the internet, globally connected and all, it really only takes one country shunning these rulings to keep content online. After that, I guess outright censorship is the only way to go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matter of time....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Matter of time....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Matter of time....
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20141031/13480629002/facebook-joins-tor-dark-web-gets-l ittle-more-useful-if-little-less-cool.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Matter of time....
Not likely in its current form. An onion service is still using the normal client/server model; it has an operator, and that operator can be sued/charged if identified--or forced to remove stories/comments. But one could imagine a decentralized Techdirt-like service where stories can't be "unpublished" and commenting happens without any involvement from the site operators (so we'd need decentralized moderation too, to block spam).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Matter of time....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Matter of time....
What do you mean by real Internet?
The web and search-engine indexed sites are a subset of the Internet, not 'the' Internet or the 'real' Internet.
The Internet existed before search engines and the web. Those are just newer services that exist on top of the existing Internet and only apply to a relatively small portion.
All the 'dark-web' is is web sites that are not indexed on the commonly available search engines and/or that do not use the standard ICANN DNS root zones. There are many sites out there that don't use any DNS at all (so you need to know the IP Address) or that use alternative root DNS systems.
Dark Web is a news or authoritarian scare term for what is, in fact, most of the Internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A sane president would try to stop this.
An insane president would see this as an opportunity to do the same thing to stop the 'fake news media' from speaking 'fake news' about him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parallel Construction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parallel Construction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Parallel Construction
Then everyone would just laugh and call him a "tin foil hat man", but not really so funny now that Snowden proved him right.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parallel Construction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parallel Construction
Blaming the illuminati is very common and while the rest bears a curious fact, illuminati is a sign that the story is not to be taken serious on its own. That there may be collusion to work against the publics best interest is a fact of politics existing, but too much irrrationality is crazy.
Look up John Plumbes photo and whatever specific builidings the guy may be referring to and his conspiracy becomes a lot less ominous at least.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parallel Construction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIv96reVlAE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"can"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "can"?
I see this is all part of the one world government. One world order, that so many people want. Even thinking some country would try this would have been laughable not all that many years ago. Now here they are trying to do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "can"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "can"?
On what basis do you figure a dispute could be raised under ISDS provisions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What ruling? I searched Google and nothing came up. Too bad, so sad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The end result
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could be a problem when two countries' laws directly contradict each other. Might be time to pull out of one of those countries altogether.
... Probably not really a practical idea but, hey, I like the idea of applying an entity's stupidity against it and watching the resulting implosion once it reaches critical mass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The 'Turnabout is Fair Play' test
For issues like this a simple test should suffice:
'If another country with different laws ordered one of your companies that happened to have an office there to block something that violated their laws but not yours, and do so globally, would you consider that acceptable? What if doing so was in violation of your laws, even if it was following their laws, would that still be acceptable?'
Or the tl;dr version:
'If you wouldn't accept other countries dictating what you were 'allowed' to see, then you have no rights to dictate to other countries what they can see.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
court can censor any website based in the us or try to block a us based website outside it,s own territory.
If this trend was carried to its logical conclusion
the only websites that could exist would be websites that comply with the laws of iran china and russia.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If have responsibilty demand rights
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cost/Benefit
tl;dr: As long as Google keeps putting up with this stuff, you can be sure they are making profits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cost/Benefit
They tried it once in China, and pretty much got hosed by Baidu and a couple of others. Google can't afford to toss away countries (especially western countries) like toilet paper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]