The Austrian Supreme Court has sent a request to the European Court of Justice to clarify whether an ISP providing Internet access to those using an alleged illegal website was to be considered as an intermediary.
In a case dating back from December 2011, brought to court by the French Association of Cinema Producers, a group representing more than 120 companies including Paramount and Sony, together with other film industry organisations, the High Court of Paris has decided, on 28 November 2013, to order Google, Microsoft and Yahoo to completely de-list 16 video streaming sites from their search results.
The complaint targeted 16 domains connected to the popular Allostreaming, Fifostream and DPstream video portals and had previously received emergency interim measures.
The UK government continues its endeavours to censor the Internet and has succeeded in convincing search engines to filter search term results “associated” with child abuse images within its child abuse policy, despite the lack of proof of any efficiency of such measures, the rinks to abuses and the dangers to the citizens’ democratic rights.
Russia has operated since 2012 a national blacklist of sites that allegedly do not comply with the law. The website blacklist currently includes hundreds of websites, from those promoting drug taking and suicide to those offering child pornography, but also sites that infringe the anti-piracy law. All these websites are to be blocked at the ISP level. Moreover, the legislation allows the blocking of sites that only link to infringing content if they do not take action within 72 hours of a complaint.
On 19 September 2013, telecoms watchdog Roskomnadzor said that Facebook has been provisionally put on a list of banned Internet sites and asked to remove controversial content within three days.
On 17 February 2009, it also adopted a non-binding resolution on the same subject. On 14 October 2011, it adopted another non-binding resolution on the same subject. Most recently, on 10 September 2013, the European Parliament adopted a non-binding resolution on online gambling.
Each time the Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO) has decided to undertake such a report, it has given responsibility for the dossier to a different Parliamentarian from a different political group.
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Finnland: Entscheidung über die Zensur einer Anti-Zensur-Website
On 26 August 2013, the Finnish Supreme Court ruled it was legal to censor a website listing domain names of sites that are currently blocked even if the site itself doesn’t host or link to illegal content.
The ruling comes in the case of Matti Nikki’s website lapsiporno.info which was added by the Finnish police on the list of websites to be filtered because it exposed the blocked links. Matti challenged the decision in court and in 2011 a Helsinki court ruled that his site should not be blocked.
The European Parliament has a committee dedicated to enhancing the European single market and consumer protection. This is a good thing. Imagine how such a committee would react to an industry that is hampered by protectionism, national monopolies and the blocking of foreign services that offer better value for money. Well, you don't have to imagine, because the so-called IMCO Committee recently adopted a report on Online Gambling (PDF). The result should be great, right? Unfortunately not.
The wave of resistance that started at Gezi Park on the 29 May 2013 in Istanbul and has since spread all over Turkey once again revealed a deep connection between real time communication on social media and social movements. Throughout the protests, social media platforms have become the primary news source in this environment where the mainstream media have proven themselves to be the site of disinformation or inertia.