Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 43
Párrafo- Paragraph text
- Intermediaries are increasingly required to assess the validity of State requests and private complaints against general legal criteria, and remove or delink such content based on such assessments. For example, the Cybercrime Act, 2015 of the United Republic of Tanzania only exempts hyperlink providers from liability for information linked provided that they "immediately remove[ ] or disable[ ] access to the information after receiving an order to do so from the relevant authority". In the context of copyright, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of the United States of America exempts providers of "online services and network access" from liability for third party content only if they respond "expeditiously to remove, or disable access to the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity" upon notice of such infringement. These notice and takedown frameworks have been criticized for incentivizing questionable claims and for failing to provide adequate protection for the intermediaries that seek to apply fair and human rights-sensitive standards to content regulation.
- Condicón jurídica
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Organismo
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Tipo de documento
- Special Procedures' report
- Medio de adopción
- N.A.
- Temas
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Personas afectadas
- All
- N.A.
- Año
- 2016
- Tipo de párrafo
- Other
- Reference
- SR Freedom of Opinion, Report to the HRC (2016), A/HRC/32/38, para. 43.
- Paragraph number
- 43
ordenados por
Fecha de adición
87 conexiones, 87 Entidades