欧洲法律中的预防性内容封锁与言论自由——冲突还是共生?

Q2 Social Sciences

Journal of Media Law Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI:10.1080/17577632.2021.2006962

Ewa Milczarek

{"title":"欧洲法律中的预防性内容封锁与言论自由——冲突还是共生?","authors":"Ewa Milczarek","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2021.2006962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Social networking sites are currently an important element of community, economic and political life. This means that a legal framework that would guarantee freedom of expression on the one hand and protection against defamation on the other must be created. The 2019 CJEU judgement in the Glawischnig-Piesczek (C-18/18) case provides another tool to control the content uploaded to social networking sites by allowing states to require the removal of information that is equivalent to the content previously declared unlawful. The aim of this paper is to analyse preventive content blocking in terms of its relation with freedom of expression. The paper ultimately intends to determine whether this tool stays in conflict with this freedom thus violating its essence or whether it rather stays in a symbiosis with it, allowing the functioning of a public debate free from distorting phenomena of hate speech and hate comment.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preventive content blocking and freedom of expression in the European law – conflict or symbiosis?\",\"authors\":\"Ewa Milczarek\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17577632.2021.2006962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Social networking sites are currently an important element of community, economic and political life. This means that a legal framework that would guarantee freedom of expression on the one hand and protection against defamation on the other must be created. The 2019 CJEU judgement in the Glawischnig-Piesczek (C-18/18) case provides another tool to control the content uploaded to social networking sites by allowing states to require the removal of information that is equivalent to the content previously declared unlawful. The aim of this paper is to analyse preventive content blocking in terms of its relation with freedom of expression. The paper ultimately intends to determine whether this tool stays in conflict with this freedom thus violating its essence or whether it rather stays in a symbiosis with it, allowing the functioning of a public debate free from distorting phenomena of hate speech and hate comment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2021.2006962\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2021.2006962","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

社交网站是当前社会、经济和政治生活的重要组成部分。这意味着必须建立一个一方面保障言论自由，另一方面防止诽谤的法律框架。2019年欧洲法院对gllawischnigi - piesczek (C-18/18)案的判决提供了另一种工具来控制上传到社交网站的内容，允许各州要求删除相当于先前宣布为非法的内容的信息。本文的目的是分析预防性内容屏蔽与言论自由的关系。本文最终打算确定这个工具是否与这种自由保持冲突，从而违反了它的本质，或者它是否与其保持共生关系，从而使公共辩论的功能免受仇恨言论和仇恨评论的扭曲现象的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Preventive content blocking and freedom of expression in the European law – conflict or symbiosis?

ABSTRACT Social networking sites are currently an important element of community, economic and political life. This means that a legal framework that would guarantee freedom of expression on the one hand and protection against defamation on the other must be created. The 2019 CJEU judgement in the Glawischnig-Piesczek (C-18/18) case provides another tool to control the content uploaded to social networking sites by allowing states to require the removal of information that is equivalent to the content previously declared unlawful. The aim of this paper is to analyse preventive content blocking in terms of its relation with freedom of expression. The paper ultimately intends to determine whether this tool stays in conflict with this freedom thus violating its essence or whether it rather stays in a symbiosis with it, allowing the functioning of a public debate free from distorting phenomena of hate speech and hate comment.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Media Law Social Sciences-Law

CiteScore

0.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?