INTERMEDIARY LIABILITY

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 231-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosa Julià-Barceló ◽  
Kamiel J Koelman
Keyword(s):  
Intermediary Liability

scholarly journals Intellectual Property Law and Extra-Contractual Liability

2021 ◽  
pp. 82-95
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Frosio
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trademark Infringement ◽  
The World ◽  
Emerging Issues ◽  
Intermediary Liability ◽  
Intellectual Property Infringement ◽  
Platform Economy

This chapter discusses intellectual property (IP) and extra-contractual liability by highlighting general comparative analysis issues within civil and common law systems, with some consideration given also to major theoretical clusters that might influence the different legal regimes. The chapter focuses on emerging issues of extra-contractual liability for intellectual property infringement in the platform economy, with special emphasis on copyright and trademark infringement, seeking to co-ordinate miscellaneous approaches from the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and selected European countries’ experiences. In doing so, this chapter highlights research and methodological issues related to limited harmonization at a regional level in secondary and extra-contractual liability doctrines when applied to IP. Finally, this chapter describes the World Intermediary Liability Maps (WILMap) as an attempt to provide consistency within a fragmented research framework while also presenting other miscellaneous endeavours seeking the same goal.

scholarly journals Incitement to riot: intermediary liability of ISP`S

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-118
Author(s):  
Murad Madzhumayev
Keyword(s):  
Information And Communication Technologies ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Communication Technologies ◽  
Eastern Bloc ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Information And Communication ◽  
Intermediary Liability ◽  
Technical Capacity ◽  
The Arab Spring

Collective actions, particularly organization, promotion, encouragement, and incitement to civil disturbances, are hard to imagine without use of information and communication technologies (ICTs). Recent events such as the Arab Spring, the colour revolutions (e.g. in former Eastern Bloc and the Balkan countries), the unrest in Minneapolis in 2020 which subsequently spread to other US cities, and the US Capitol riots 2021 present significant evidence in this regard. The dissemination of information online inciting to riots involves internet service providers (ISPs) alongside the author. The aim of the paper is to specify the actors in accordance with their functions and determine their eligibility to be prosecuted in cases of incitement to riots using ICTs. Formulated a conclusion about the onset of intermediary liability of ISPs, holding the organizational and technical capacity to influence the information social relations of their users at any time.

Debunking Intermediary Censorship Framework in Social Media via a Content Retrieval and Classification Software

2017 ◽  
pp. 169-195
Author(s):  
Baramee Navanopparatskul ◽  
Sukree Sinthupinyo ◽  
Pirongrong Ramasoota
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Business Organizations ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Online Discussion Forum ◽  
Content Retrieval ◽  
Intermediary Liability ◽  
Online Service Providers

Following the enactment of computer crime law in Thailand, online service providers are compelled to control illegal content including content that is deemed harmful or problematic. This situation leads to self-censorship of intermediaries, often resulting in overblocking to avoid violating the law. Such filtering flaw both infringes users' freedom of expression and impedes the business of OSPs in Thailand. The Innovative Retrieval System (IRS) is thus developed to investigate intermediary censorship in online discussion forum, Pantip.com, as a case study of social media. The result shows that there is no consistency of censorship pattern on the website at all. The censorship criteria depend on type of content in each forum. Overblocking is also high, over 70% of removed content, due to intimidation of governmental agencies, lawsuits from business organizations, and fear of intermediary liability. Website administrator admitted that he would cut off some users to avoid business troubles.

7. Defamation

2019 ◽  
pp. 160-204
Author(s):  
Andrew Murray
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Online Publication ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Internet Service Providers ◽  
Traditional Media ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Intermediary Liability

This chapter examines defamation cases arising from traditional media sites and user-generated media entries. It first provides an overview of the tort of defamation, and the issue of who is responsible and potentially liable for an online defamatory statement. It then looks at the Defamation Act 2013, considering when defences may be raised to a claim in defamation, and how online publication and republication may result in defamation. Four cases are analysed: Dow Jones v Gutnick, Loutchansky v Times Newspapers, King v Lewis, and Jameel v Dow Jones. The chapter explores intermediary liability, particularly the liability of UK internet service providers, by citing recent decisions on intermediary liability such as Tamiz v Google, Delfi v Estonia, and MTE v Hungary, as well as specific intermediary defences found in the Defamation Act 2013. The chapter concludes by discussing key social media cases such as McAlpine v Bercow and Monroe v Hopkins.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document