Skip to main content

Home/ Duty of care + Standards _ CU/ Group items tagged notice-and-takedown

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Carsten Ullrich

Systemic Duties of Care and Intermediary Liability - Daphne Keller | Inforrm's Blog - 0 views

inforrm.org/...ediary-liability-daphne-keller

intermediary liability regulation duty of care

shared by Carsten Ullrich on 16 Jun 20 - Cached
  • ursuing two reasonable-sounding goals for platform regulation
  • irst, they want platforms to abide by a “duty of care,” going beyond today’s notice-and-takedown based legal m
  • Second, they want to preserve existing immunitie
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • ystemic duty of care” is a legal standard for assessing a platform’s overall system for handling harmful online content. It is not intended to define liability for any particular piece of content, or the outcome of particular litigation disputes.
  • The basic idea is that platforms should improve their systems for reducing online harms. This could mean following generally applicable rules established in legislation, regulations, or formal guidelines; or it could mean working with the regulator to produce and implement a platform-specific plan.
  • In one sense I have a lot of sympathy for this approach
  • In another sense, I am quite leery of the duty of care idea.
  • he actions platforms might take to comply with a SDOC generally fall into two categories. The first encompasses improvements to existing notice-and-takedown systems.
  • he second SDOC category – which is in many ways more consequential – includes obligations for platforms to proactively detect and remove or demote such content.
  • Proactive Monitoring Measures
    • Carsten Ullrich
      Carsten Ullrich on 16 Jun 20
       
      this is a bit too narrow, proactivity means really a rsk based approach, nit just monitoring, but monitoring for threats and risks
  • The eCommerce Directive and DMCA both permit certain injunctions, even against intermediaries that are otherwise immune from damages. Here again, the platform’s existing capabilities – its capacity to know about and control user content – matter. In the U.K. Mosley v. Google case, for example, the claimant successfully argued that because Google already used technical filters to block illegal child sexual abuse material, it could potentially be compelled to filter the additional images at image in his case.
Carsten Ullrich

Problems with Filters in the European Commission's Platforms Proposal - Daphne Keller |... - 0 views

inforrm.org/...atforms-proposal-daphne-keller

intermediary notice-and-takedown intellectual property copyright filtering human rights EU

shared by Carsten Ullrich on 17 Oct 17 - Cached
  • ey are shockingly expensive – YouTube’s ContentID had cost Google $60 million as of several years ago – so only incumbents can afford them. Start-ups forced to build them won’t be able to afford it, or will build lousy ones with high error rates. Filters address symptoms and leave underlying problems to fester – like, in the case of radical Islamist material, the brutal conflict in Syria, global refugee crisis, and marginalization of Muslim immigrants to the US and Europe. All these problems make filters incredibly hard to justify without some great demonstrated upside – but no one has demonstrated such a thing.
  • The DMCA moves literally billions of disputes about online speech out of courts and into the hands of private parties.
  • That allocative choice was reasonable in 1998, and it remains reasonable in 2016.
    • Carsten Ullrich
      Carsten Ullrich on 17 Oct 17
       
      I dont think so.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • The Internet has grown exponentially in size since the DMCA was enacted, but we should not forget that the problem of large-scale infringement was an expected development—and one that the safe harbors were specifically designed to manage.
    • Carsten Ullrich
      Carsten Ullrich on 17 Oct 17
       
      any proof for that assertion?
Carsten Ullrich

Facebook Publishes Enforcement Numbers for the First Time | Facebook Newsroom - 0 views

newsroom.fb.com/...enforcement-numbers

facebook speech notice-and-takedown filtering duty of care

shared by Carsten Ullrich on 05 Jun 18 - Cached
  • 86% of which was identified by our technology before it was reported to Facebook.
  • For hate speech, our technology still doesn’t work that well and so it needs to be checked by our review teams. We removed 2.5 million pieces of hate speech in Q1 2018 — 38% of which was flagged by our technology.
  • addition, in many areas — whether it’s spam, porn or fake accounts — we’re up against sophisticated adversaries who continually change tactics to circumvent our controls,
1 - 6 of 6
Showing 20▼ items per page