Saturday

17th Apr 2021

Column / Brussels Bytes

ECJ should rule against Austrian online censorship lawsuit

  • Eva Glawischnig, former Austrian Green Party leader, has taken Facebook to the court in an attempt to censor what people around the world read about her on Facebook. (Photo: Die Grünen Linz)

A former politician in Austria wants to censor what people around the world read about her on social media.

Having already won an injunction against Facebook regarding posts that insulted her, former Green Party leader Eva Glawischnig is now appealing for the courts to compel Facebook to seek out and delete similar posts across its entire global platform.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • Facebook is in the centre of a new ECJ case from Austria, which may set a precedent for other countries wanting to delete online material anywhere in the EU or world (Photo: Spencer E Holtaway)

EU judges now have an opportunity to make it clear that no member state can decide what the rest of the world reads online, because Austria's Supreme Court has referred the matter to the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

Since countries have different laws on the limits to free speech, none should be allowed to censor social media beyond its borders.

The case concerns posts that called Glawischnig a "corrupt tramp" and a "Volksverräterin," a Nazi slur meaning a traitor to one's people.

In December 2016, an Austrian court ordered Facebook to remove the posts and all verbatim copies, and in May last year, an appeals court ruled Facebook must apply the injunction globally. Glawischnig appealed for a second time, claiming Facebook should also have to find and remove similar posts.

This month, the country's Supreme Court passed her case to the ECJ because EU law prohibits member states from imposing a general obligation on companies to filter information for illegal content.

The comments about Glawischnig are vulgar, but entirely legal under the laws of many other countries, which have different standards of free expression and different methods for dealing with defamation and hate speech.

Undermining sovereignty

Companies should respect local laws wherever they operate, but not to the extent of undermining other countries' sovereignty.

A reasonable solution in this case would be to block the offending posts in Austria and allow them everywhere else. Austrian judges should not dictate what users outside Austria can share on Facebook.

If the ECJ supports last May's ruling it would set a precedent that other countries could point to when they want to control what people can read online.

Pakistan, for example, has put pressure on Facebook to crack down on what the government calls "blasphemy," meaning challenges to religious orthodoxy, which carries the death penalty in that country.

It would not be much of a stretch for Pakistan to order Facebook to take down insufficiently pious content worldwide, including in Europe.

Closer to home, Turkey's president has aggressively pursued legal action against his critics in Germany and Spain.

Even in Hungary, an EU member state, the national government has used drastic constitutional and legal changes to control domestic media and suppress criticism. If the EU allows Austria to limit free speech beyond its borders, why not let others interfere with the rights of Europeans too?

Incompatible with global internet

Another reason why the lawsuit is troubling is that Glawischnig wants to force Facebook to remove anything similar to the original posts, which would push the company to delete too much.

Facebook's algorithms can help identify similar posts, but they are blunt tools because they either miss things or remove too much, so moderators have to review borderline cases. Whenever there is any doubt about whether a post is unacceptably similar to the originals, the prospect of further legal trouble will pressure Facebook to delete it rather than not.

The Glawischnig case is not the first time a European court has tried to censor what the rest of the world can read on the internet. French judges have ordered Google to prevent users all over the world from accessing old news articles about French citizens, under the EU's "right to be forgotten."

Such demands are incompatible with the global Internet, where countries generally can set their own rules, but do not have the right to meddle with what people elsewhere can read. The ECJ should make that clear when it decides the Glawischnig case.

Nick Wallace is a Brussels-based senior policy analyst at the Center for Data Innovation. His Brussels Bytes column deals with the digital single market and data-related policy issues in the European Union.

Facebook promises more privacy ahead of new EU rules

Speaking in Brussels, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's chief operating officer, says the social media giant has "not done enough to stop the abuse of our technology." Her admission comes with new plans to wrestle with "bad content".

Austrian privacy case against Facebook hits legal snag

Austrian privacy campaigner Max Schrems may sue Facebook Ireland in an Austrian court but won't be able to pursue a class action suit in Austria, according to a non-binding opinion by a top EU court advisor.

Column / Brussels Bytes

EU e-privacy proposal risks breaking 'Internet of Things'

EU policymakers need to clarify that the e-privacy should not apply to most Internet of Things devices. The current proposal require explicit user consent in all cases - which is not practical.

News in Brief

  1. EU postpones decision on labelling gas 'sustainable'
  2. MEPs call for mass surveillance ban in EU public spaces
  3. Greek and Turkish ministers trade jibes in Ankara
  4. Biden repeats opposition to Russia-Germany pipeline
  5. Navalny in danger, letter warns EU foreign ministers
  6. Lithuania keen to use Denmark's AstraZeneca vaccines
  7. Gas plants largest source of power-sector emissions
  8. Study: Higher risk of blood clots from Covid than vaccines

Are EU data watchdogs staffed for GDPR?

The success of the new general data protection regulation (GDPR) will depend on whether data protection authorities enforce the new rules - which, in turn, will be at least partly determined by how many people they employ.

Eight countries to miss EU data protection deadline

The EU starts enforcing its general data protection regulation on 25 May - but Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania and Slovenia won't be ready. The delay will cause legal uncertainty.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersDigitalisation can help us pick up the green pace
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersCOVID19 is a wake-up call in the fight against antibiotic resistance
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersThe Nordic Region can and should play a leading role in Europe’s digital development
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Council to host EU webinars on energy, digitalisation and antibiotic resistance
  5. UNESDAEU Code of Conduct can showcase PPPs delivering healthier more sustainable society
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersWomen benefit in the digitalised labour market

Latest News

  1. US rejects Slovenia-linked plan to break up Bosnia
  2. Ukraine urges Borrell to visit Russia front line
  3. Could US sanctions hit Russia vaccine sales to EU?
  4. Polish court pushes out critical ombudsman
  5. Political crises in Romania and Bulgaria amid third wave
  6. Von der Leyen's summer plans undisclosed, after Ukraine snub
  7. Over a million EU citizens back farm-animal cage ban
  8. Three options for West on Putin's Ukraine build-up

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us