EU Parliament's 'More Thoughtful' Approach To Regulating The Internet Still A Complete Disaster
from the regulating-human-behavior dept
For a while now, the EU has been working on its latest big update to internet regulations, mostly under the umbrella of the Digital Services Act (DSA). Multiple people who have been following the process there have noted how much more thoughtful the process has been for the DSA as compared to internet regulatory attempts in the US, which seem to mostly be driven by which senator thinks they can get the biggest headlines for misrepresenting which particular outrage this week. A more careful, thoughtful approach is definitely appreciated, but that doesn't mean the results will be any good. Last week, the EU Parliament approved the latest version of the DSA in what has been seen as something of a mixed bag.
Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer described the final vote as having both "huge success and major setbacks." I'm actually a bit surprised that the EFF seems mostly happy with the result (with a few caveats), though that seems to mainly be because a few really bad ideas didn't make the cut. But, it still seems like an awful lot of bad ideas did make it through.
The good parts are that the new DSA mostly retains the E-Commerce Directive's "conditional liability regime" and rejected a proposal that would require "general monitoring" (i.e., faulty filters to try to screen "bad stuff"). There was an attempt to go even further and ban upload filters entirely, but that was rejected. Similarly a proposal to say that courts could not require ISPs engage in full site blocking was rejected.
On the good side, this version of the DSA includes a right to pay for digital services anonymously, though it rejected a limitation on requiring a court order for government's to snoop through your data. It also rejected a proposal that would require a court order to remove content -- banning the practice of enabling government agencies to order content removals. This is extremely unfortunate, and an attack on due process.
There's a lot more in there that's a mix of good and bad, and the whole thing isn't truly final yet either. But, I still think that overall the DSA will have a hugely negative impact on internet freedoms and free speech, even if it got some small things at the margin right.
In the end, I do think that any big "sweeping" set of internet regulations -- whether prepared thoughtfully or not -- are always going to be a disaster. They can't take into account how complex the world is, can't take into account context, and can't take into account the general dynamism of the internet -- and how quickly things change. Not only that, but just the very process of opening up such sweeping regulations that cover so much of how the internet works for users is going to get hijacked by special interests who want this or that thing included in the final regulation.
Is the process more reality-based than the US's grandstand-o-rama? Sure. Will the end results be any better? Doesn't seem like it.
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: anonymity, conditional liability, data, digital services act, dsa, eu, filters, intermediary liability, internet regulations, privacy
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
those making the decisions are stuck so far up the USA entertainment industries and Hollywood's ass, they'll do anything to please them. they totally ignore what they are supposed to ensure, that everything is fair and not one-sided!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
These are European regulators, not known for being fans of large US companies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No one disagrees that firm government regulation of the worldwide internet is absolutely critical to its proper functioning.
U.S. regulation is hopelessly mired in special interest politics, as usual.
The EU government regulatory model however does offer some hope for U.S. regulatory reform. Some Asian nations also have a thoughtful overall approach to defining the common sense limits of internet activities and harmful growth excesses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
One example uk proposes a law that wants content that might upset children but is legal yeah the Web is gonna be rated pg13? EU regulators don't understand the web that make laws that try to regulate all. Content txt video audio music fair use is not really in force in the EU each country has different laws plus the Web changes every few months
Who predicted gen z would use memes to communicate or make a political statement who predicted a new app would come along that has more viewers than YouTube tik Tok
Some country's want a link tax that would cripple startups and free speech and is not really any good for journalists
Some idiots think copyright good oh more copyright must be better
Yeah those software patents worked out great
If big legacy corporations start pushing link taxs readers will simply go elsewhere or else use american websites like
Newser drudge etc
Plus lawmakers simply do not understand how the Web works
And laws effect small creators not big media corporations
Result bad news for the public and ordinary users who don't have paid lobbyists to speak up for them
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
....But SOMEBODY must make the regulatory intenet rules for the common good of society.
WHO is qualified to make our internet rules ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
They have less envy for media than they do for tech.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I have to disagree with you about there being no disagreement. Wannabe regulators are all about foxes declaring chickenwire in henhouses unfair.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Eh. They could be thoughtful when it comes to defining them. More often than not they'll shrug things off as "it's a necessary evil" and "it can't be helped" before playing the "we have to keep up with international standards to stay competitive" card.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
very nice sir <a href="https://instartech.in/">instartech</a>
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
WHO couldn't even keep korona contained.
[ link to this | view in thread ]