Network Enforcement Act: Difference between revisions
→United Nations: Moved event of Facebook fine under History; pared down coverage given to biased source (Facebook) to preserve NPOV |
→Facebook fine for underreporting complaints: moved uncited criticism of the Act to the talk page |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
=== Journalists and journalist groups === |
=== Journalists and journalist groups === |
||
[[Reporters Without Borders]] claimed the Act could "massively damage the basic rights to [[freedom of the press]] and [[freedom of expression]]."<ref>{{Cite web|date=January 2021|title=Guardian News and Media Written Evidence|url=https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/21717/html/|url-status=live|publisher=House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee inquiry into Freedom of Expression Online}}</ref> |
[[Reporters Without Borders]] claimed the Act could "massively damage the basic rights to [[freedom of the press]] and [[freedom of expression]]."<ref>{{Cite web|date=January 2021|title=Guardian News and Media Written Evidence|url=https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/21717/html/|url-status=live|publisher=House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee inquiry into Freedom of Expression Online}}</ref> The [[Committee to Protect Journalists]]' [[Courtney C. Radsch|Courtney Radsch]] warned that the law would risk privatizing censorship.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://cpj.org/blog/2017/04/proposed-german-legislation-threatens-broad-intern.php|title=Proposed German legislation threatens broad internet censorship|last1=Avenue|first1=Committee to Protect Journalists 330 7th|last2=York|first2=11th Floor New|website=cpj.org|language=en|access-date=2019-11-06|last3=Ny 10001|date=20 April 2017}}</ref> |
||
The Oxford Internet Institute warned that the law may heavily restrict freedom of expression and Internet freedom.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Computational Propaganda: Political Parties, Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media|last=Neudert|first=Lisa-Maria|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-0190931414|pages=153–185|chapter=Germany: A Cautionary Tale}}</ref> |
The Oxford Internet Institute warned that the law may heavily restrict freedom of expression and Internet freedom.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Computational Propaganda: Political Parties, Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media|last=Neudert|first=Lisa-Maria|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-0190931414|pages=153–185|chapter=Germany: A Cautionary Tale}}</ref> |
||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
Kaye also expressed concerns that "violative content" and its associated user information would have to be stored on private servers and could be accessed by court orders, which may undermine the right to anonymous expression. Furthermore, the Act would burden private companies with protecting the privacy and security of large amounts of private data. |
Kaye also expressed concerns that "violative content" and its associated user information would have to be stored on private servers and could be accessed by court orders, which may undermine the right to anonymous expression. Furthermore, the Act would burden private companies with protecting the privacy and security of large amounts of private data. |
||
== History == |
== History == |
||
=== Facebook fine for underreporting complaints === |
=== Facebook fine for underreporting complaints === |
||
In July 2019, Facebook was fined 2 million Euros by Germany's Federal Office of Justice for under-reporting complaints about illegal content.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Escritt|first=Thomas|date=2019-07-02|title=Germany fines Facebook for under-reporting complaints|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-facebook-germany-fine-idUKKCN1TX1I0|access-date=2022-01-11}}</ref> According to Germany's Federal Office of Justice, Facebook did not |
In July 2019, Facebook was fined 2 million Euros by Germany's Federal Office of Justice for under-reporting complaints about illegal content.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Escritt|first=Thomas|date=2019-07-02|title=Germany fines Facebook for under-reporting complaints|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-facebook-germany-fine-idUKKCN1TX1I0|access-date=2022-01-11}}</ref> According to Germany's Federal Office of Justice, Facebook did not include user reports that posts violated community standards. However, Facebook claimed that aspects of the law "lacked clarity" and it did comply with mandatory reporting requirements. |
||
Facebook has criticised the draft law. In a statement sent to the German Bundestag at the end of May 2017, the company stated: "The constitutional state must not pass on its own shortcomings and responsibility to private companies. Preventing and combating hate speech and false reports is a public task from which the state must not escape". In its statement, Facebook claimed "The amount of the fines is disproportionate to the sanctioned behaviour".<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=Kurz|first=Constanze|date=2017-05-29|title=Facebook lehnt das NetzDG ab: Unbestimmt, unwirksam und verfassungswidrig|url=https://netzpolitik.org/2017/facebook-lehnt-das-netzdg-ab-unbestimmt-unwirksam-und-verfassungswidrig/|access-date=2020-08-14|website=[[Netzpolitik]]|language=de-DE}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Sugandha Lahoti|date=2019-07-03|title=Facebook fined $2.3 million by Germany for providing incomplete information about hate speech content|url=https://hub.packtpub.com/facebook-fined-2-3-million-by-germany-for-providing-incomplete-information-about-hate-speech-content/|access-date=2020-08-14|website=Packt Hub|language=en-US}}</ref> |
Facebook has criticised the draft law. In a statement sent to the German Bundestag at the end of May 2017, the company stated: "The constitutional state must not pass on its own shortcomings and responsibility to private companies. Preventing and combating hate speech and false reports is a public task from which the state must not escape". In its statement, Facebook claimed "The amount of the fines is disproportionate to the sanctioned behaviour".<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=Kurz|first=Constanze|date=2017-05-29|title=Facebook lehnt das NetzDG ab: Unbestimmt, unwirksam und verfassungswidrig|url=https://netzpolitik.org/2017/facebook-lehnt-das-netzdg-ab-unbestimmt-unwirksam-und-verfassungswidrig/|access-date=2020-08-14|website=[[Netzpolitik]]|language=de-DE}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Sugandha Lahoti|date=2019-07-03|title=Facebook fined $2.3 million by Germany for providing incomplete information about hate speech content|url=https://hub.packtpub.com/facebook-fined-2-3-million-by-germany-for-providing-incomplete-information-about-hate-speech-content/|access-date=2020-08-14|website=Packt Hub|language=en-US}}</ref> |
||
Revision as of 02:58, 11 January 2022
The Network Enforcement Act (Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz, NetzDG; German: Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtsdurchsetzung in sozialen Netzwerken), also known as the Facebook Act (Facebook-Gesetz),[1] is a German law passed in June 2017 aimed at combating hate speech and fake news in social networks.[2] The Act obligates social media platforms with over 2 million users to remove "clearly illegal" content within 24 hours and all illegal content within 7 days of it being posted, or face a maximum fine of 50 million Euros. The deleted content must be stored for at least 10 weeks afterwards, and platforms must submit transparency reports on dealing with illegal content every six months.[3] However, the law has been criticised by various groups for incentivising social media platforms to self-censor in cases where there may be valid and lawful expression.
Background
 |
In 2015, the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection set up a working group on the handling of criminal content in social networks. Some networks made voluntary commitments, but the ministry considered them insufficient.
Justice Minister Heiko Maas argued that an evaluation of legal practice in the deletion of criminal content in social networks by "jugendschutz.net" in early 2017 revealed that deletions of hateful comments were insufficient, and he called for further increased pressure on social networks. To make companies more accountable, he considered that legal regulations were needed. Although 90 percent of the punishable content was deleted on YouTube, it was only 39 percent on Facebook and only 1 percent on Twitter.[citation needed]
Advice and adoption
|
On May 16, 2017, the government parties CDU/CSU and SPD introduced the bill to the Bundestag. The first reading on May 19 showed that the draft was also controversial within the CDU/CSU and SPD. Petra Sitte (The Left) warned against serious collateral damage to the freedom of expression. Konstantin von Notz (The Greens) warned against pushing large network providers into the role of judges. The scientific services of the Bundestag expressed concerns in an expert opinion that the bill violates the German constitution and European Union law.
Representatives of the CDU/CSU and the SPD parliamentary groups then made changes to the draft. According to them, the service agent to be appointed by network operators in Germany must provide information within 48 hours if authorities contact the agent about illegal content. In addition, a possibility was provided to leave decisions in difficult cases to an "independent body", to be subordinate to the Federal Office of Justice. However, details on the structure and the composition of that body remained unclear. The controversial deletion periods of 24 hours or seven days and the threat of punishment of up to 50 million euros were unchanged.
The Bundestag passed the amended draft on 30 June 2017 with most votes of the government factions against the votes of the Left and the CSU, with the abstention of Alliance 90/The Greens.
Draft law and reactions
|
In spring 2017, Maas presented the draft for a Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG). According to the federal government, social networks would be forced to remove hate speech more consistently. The maximum penalty for a failure to abide by the law would be 50 million Euros. The draft was sharply criticised by interest groups, civil rights activists, lawyers and data protection activists.
The draft law referred to commercial social networks on the Internet with at least 2 million members, not to journalistically- and editorially-designed services (§ 1 NetzDG). Providers must establish a transparent procedure for dealing with complaints about illegal content (§ 3 NetzDG) and are subject to a reporting and documentation obligation (§ 2 NetzDG). They must check complaints immediately, delete "obviously illegal" content within 24 hours, delete any illegal content within 7 days it has been checked and block access to it. Complainants and users must be informed immediately of the decisions taken. The deleted content must be stored for at least ten weeks for evidence purposes. Violations are considered administrative offences for which sensitive fines of up to 5 million euros are provided (§ 4 NetzDG). In addition, providers must provide a service agent in Germany both to the authorities and for civil proceedings (§ 5 NetzDG). Social networks are still expected to submit a six-monthly report on the complaints that have been received and how they have been dealt with.
The draft also contained an amendment to § 14 Paragraph 2 of the Telemedia Act, which concerns the publication of users' master data. The draft law provided for the publication of data not only for the "enforcement of intellectual property rights" but also for "other absolutely protected rights". The Telemedia Act applies to far more services than social networks.
Criticism
According to the Federal Ministry of Justice, social networks do not set the standard for what must be deleted or blocked. "The German penal laws alone are authoritative. The Network Enforcement Act therefore does not create any new deletion obligations. Rather, it is intended to ensure that existing law is observed and enforced".[citation needed] The aim of the deletion of criminal contributions by social networks is to ensure a free, open and democratic culture of communication and to protect groups and individuals affected by hate crimes. The Federal Office of Justice adds: "Regardless of the provisions of the Network Enforcement Act, anyone who distributes criminal content on the Internet will also be prosecuted.[citation needed] The prosecution authorities (police/public prosecutor's office) will continue to be responsible for this". Those assessments and other aspects of the law have received criticism from various quarters:
Journalists and journalist groups
Reporters Without Borders claimed the Act could "massively damage the basic rights to freedom of the press and freedom of expression."[4] The Committee to Protect Journalists' Courtney Radsch warned that the law would risk privatizing censorship.[5]
The Oxford Internet Institute warned that the law may heavily restrict freedom of expression and Internet freedom.[6]
United Nations
In June 2017, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for the Protection of Freedom of Opinion and Expression, David Kaye, criticised the planned regulations in a statement to the federal government. He considered that some parts of the draft law would be incompatible with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[7] He also raised the following concerns:
- Online providers would have to delete information partly on the basis of "vague and ambiguous" criteria.
- The maximum fines would be disproportionate to the offence itself, and "may prompt social networks to remove content that may be lawful." Especially due to the short timeframes for removing content (7 days for illegal content and 24 hours for clearly illegal content), could lead providers to engage in precautionary censorship by deleting legitimate expression
- The legality of information is often dependent on context, which would be difficult for platforms to accurately evaluate.
Kaye also expressed concerns that "violative content" and its associated user information would have to be stored on private servers and could be accessed by court orders, which may undermine the right to anonymous expression. Furthermore, the Act would burden private companies with protecting the privacy and security of large amounts of private data.
History
Facebook fine for underreporting complaints
In July 2019, Facebook was fined 2 million Euros by Germany's Federal Office of Justice for under-reporting complaints about illegal content.[8] According to Germany's Federal Office of Justice, Facebook did not include user reports that posts violated community standards. However, Facebook claimed that aspects of the law "lacked clarity" and it did comply with mandatory reporting requirements.
Facebook has criticised the draft law. In a statement sent to the German Bundestag at the end of May 2017, the company stated: "The constitutional state must not pass on its own shortcomings and responsibility to private companies. Preventing and combating hate speech and false reports is a public task from which the state must not escape". In its statement, Facebook claimed "The amount of the fines is disproportionate to the sanctioned behaviour".[9][10]
References
- ^ Schedelbeck, Paul; Harner, Miriam; Körber, Jasmin (2 January 2018). ""Facebook-Gesetz": Ein Gesetz, das die Freiheit im Netz beschneiden könnte". Puls (in German). Bayerischer Rundfunk.
- ^ Knight, Ben (1 January 2018). "Germany implements new internet hate speech crackdown". DW. Retrieved 22 November 2018.
- ^ Sugandha Lahoti (3 July 2019). "Facebook fined $2.3 million by Germany for providing incomplete information about hate speech content". Packt Hub. Retrieved 11 January 2022.
- ^ "Guardian News and Media Written Evidence". House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee inquiry into Freedom of Expression Online. January 2021.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ Avenue, Committee to Protect Journalists 330 7th; York, 11th Floor New; Ny 10001 (20 April 2017). "Proposed German legislation threatens broad internet censorship". cpj.org. Retrieved 6 November 2019.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) - ^ Neudert, Lisa-Maria (2018). "Germany: A Cautionary Tale". Computational Propaganda: Political Parties, Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media. Oxford University Press. pp. 153–185. ISBN 978-0190931414.
- ^ "Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression" (PDF). Retrieved 6 November 2019.
- ^ Escritt, Thomas (2 July 2019). "Germany fines Facebook for under-reporting complaints". Reuters. Retrieved 11 January 2022.
- ^ Kurz, Constanze (29 May 2017). "Facebook lehnt das NetzDG ab: Unbestimmt, unwirksam und verfassungswidrig". Netzpolitik (in German). Retrieved 14 August 2020.
- ^ Sugandha Lahoti (3 July 2019). "Facebook fined $2.3 million by Germany for providing incomplete information about hate speech content". Packt Hub. Retrieved 14 August 2020.