Keyword: Freedom of expression

International copyright reform in support of open legal information (working paper draft, Sep. 2016) external link

van Eechoud, M. & Guibault, L.
2016

Abstract

This paper analyzes the status of legal information under international and national copyright laws. It argues that the current uncertainties with respect to the copyright status of primary legal materials (legislation, court decisions) and secondary legal materials such as parliamentary records and other official texts relevant to the interpretation of law, constitute a barrier to access and use. The time has come for reform of the international copyright system in WIPO. International law should recognize explicitly that primary and secondary legal materials are public domain and thus not subject to copyright or related rights. This will bring outdated copyright norms across the world up to date with current developments: the trend towards universal recognition of the right to access government information as part of human rights, the UN’s sustainable development goals with respect to access to law, and the rapid growth of open government policies worldwide, supported by the Open Government Partnership (OGP).

access to law, Copyright, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Fundamental rights, open government, right to know

Bibtex

Article{vanEechoud2016, title = {International copyright reform in support of open legal information (working paper draft, Sep. 2016)}, author = {van Eechoud, M. and Guibault, L.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/OpendataCopyrightReform_ODRSdraft-WP_sep16.pdf}, year = {0930}, date = {2016-09-30}, abstract = {This paper analyzes the status of legal information under international and national copyright laws. It argues that the current uncertainties with respect to the copyright status of primary legal materials (legislation, court decisions) and secondary legal materials such as parliamentary records and other official texts relevant to the interpretation of law, constitute a barrier to access and use. The time has come for reform of the international copyright system in WIPO. International law should recognize explicitly that primary and secondary legal materials are public domain and thus not subject to copyright or related rights. This will bring outdated copyright norms across the world up to date with current developments: the trend towards universal recognition of the right to access government information as part of human rights, the UN’s sustainable development goals with respect to access to law, and the rapid growth of open government policies worldwide, supported by the Open Government Partnership (OGP).}, keywords = {access to law, Copyright, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Fundamental rights, open government, right to know}, }

Welcome to the Jungle: the Liability of Internet Intermediaries for Privacy Violations in Europe external link

van der Sloot, B.
JIPITEC, num: 3, pp: 211-228., 2016

Abstract

In Europe, roughly three regimes apply to the liability of Internet intermediaries for privacy violations conducted by users through their network. These are: the e-Commerce Directive, which, under certain conditions, excludes them from liability; the Data Protection Directive, which imposes a number of duties and responsibilities on providers processing personal data; and the freedom of expression, contained inter alia in the ECHR, which, under certain conditions, grants Internet providers several privileges and freedoms. Each doctrine has its own field of application, but they also have partial overlap. In practice, this creates legal inequality and uncertainty, especially with regard to providers that host online platforms and process User Generated Content.

Data protection, ECHR, Freedom of expression, Grondrechten, intermediaries, liability, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Welcome to the Jungle: the Liability of Internet Intermediaries for Privacy Violations in Europe}, author = {van der Sloot, B.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1720.pdf}, year = {0119}, date = {2016-01-19}, journal = {JIPITEC}, number = {3}, abstract = {In Europe, roughly three regimes apply to the liability of Internet intermediaries for privacy violations conducted by users through their network. These are: the e-Commerce Directive, which, under certain conditions, excludes them from liability; the Data Protection Directive, which imposes a number of duties and responsibilities on providers processing personal data; and the freedom of expression, contained inter alia in the ECHR, which, under certain conditions, grants Internet providers several privileges and freedoms. Each doctrine has its own field of application, but they also have partial overlap. In practice, this creates legal inequality and uncertainty, especially with regard to providers that host online platforms and process User Generated Content.}, keywords = {Data protection, ECHR, Freedom of expression, Grondrechten, intermediaries, liability, Privacy}, }

The development of freedom of expression and information within the UN: leaps and bounds or fits and starts? external link

McGonagle, T.
0605

Abstract

This chapter tells the story of how the rights to freedom of expression and information have been shaped by the United Nations’ (UN) institutional dynamics over the years. It gives an account of how the growth of the rights to freedom of expression and information has been both stimulated and stymied by different factors in the particular institutional context of the UN. It traces the broad contours of the two rights by connecting the largest conceptual, normative, historical and institutional dots.<br /> The chapter opens with a brief exploration of the contiguous nature of the rights to freedom of expression and information. This necessarily involves reflection on the instrumental role that the media and new communications technologies can play in the realization of both rights in practice. The remainder of the chapter has an overtly institutional focus. Its next three substantive sections correspond to three broad – roughly chronological, but occasionally overlapping - phases in the development of freedom of expression and information at the UN. Each period is denoted by its key features or aspirations: trail-blazing, consolidation and expansion, and the quest for coherence and consistency. Various thematic challenges have presented themselves during these periods, a number of which are woven into the chapter’s narrative. Finally, after offering some substantive conclusions, the chapter will explain the objectives and structure of the book as a whole.

Freedom of expression, frontpages, Grondrechten, UN, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Chapter{McGonagle2015, title = {The development of freedom of expression and information within the UN: leaps and bounds or fits and starts?}, author = {McGonagle, T.}, year = {0605}, date = {2015-06-05}, abstract = {This chapter tells the story of how the rights to freedom of expression and information have been shaped by the United Nations’ (UN) institutional dynamics over the years. It gives an account of how the growth of the rights to freedom of expression and information has been both stimulated and stymied by different factors in the particular institutional context of the UN. It traces the broad contours of the two rights by connecting the largest conceptual, normative, historical and institutional dots.<br /> The chapter opens with a brief exploration of the contiguous nature of the rights to freedom of expression and information. This necessarily involves reflection on the instrumental role that the media and new communications technologies can play in the realization of both rights in practice. The remainder of the chapter has an overtly institutional focus. Its next three substantive sections correspond to three broad – roughly chronological, but occasionally overlapping - phases in the development of freedom of expression and information at the UN. Each period is denoted by its key features or aspirations: trail-blazing, consolidation and expansion, and the quest for coherence and consistency. Various thematic challenges have presented themselves during these periods, a number of which are woven into the chapter’s narrative. Finally, after offering some substantive conclusions, the chapter will explain the objectives and structure of the book as a whole.}, keywords = {Freedom of expression, frontpages, Grondrechten, UN, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

Freedom of Expression and ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Cases in the Netherlands after Google Spain external link

Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.
European Data Protection Law Review, num: 2, pp: 113-125., 2015

Abstract

Since the Google Spain judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, Europeans have, under certain conditions, the right to have search results for their name delisted. This paper examines how the Google Spain judgment has been applied in the Netherlands. Since the Google Spain judgment, Dutch courts have decided on two cases regarding delisting requests. In both cases, the Dutch courts considered freedom of expression aspects of delisting more thoroughly than the Court of Justice. However, the effect of the Google Spain judgment on freedom of expression is difficult to assess, as search engine operators decide about most delisting requests without disclosing much about their decisions.

Data protection law, european court of justice, Freedom of expression, google spain, Grondrechten, Privacy, right to be delisted, right to be forgotten, search engines, the netherlands, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Freedom of Expression and ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Cases in the Netherlands after Google Spain}, author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.}, url = {http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2652171}, year = {0917}, date = {2015-09-17}, journal = {European Data Protection Law Review}, number = {2}, abstract = {Since the Google Spain judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, Europeans have, under certain conditions, the right to have search results for their name delisted. This paper examines how the Google Spain judgment has been applied in the Netherlands. Since the Google Spain judgment, Dutch courts have decided on two cases regarding delisting requests. In both cases, the Dutch courts considered freedom of expression aspects of delisting more thoroughly than the Court of Justice. However, the effect of the Google Spain judgment on freedom of expression is difficult to assess, as search engine operators decide about most delisting requests without disclosing much about their decisions.}, keywords = {Data protection law, european court of justice, Freedom of expression, google spain, Grondrechten, Privacy, right to be delisted, right to be forgotten, search engines, the netherlands, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

Political Advertising Bans and Freedom of Expression external link

Fahy, R.
Greek Public Law Journal, pp: 226-228, 2015

Abstract

In Animal Defenders International v UK, the 17-judge Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK’s ban on political advertising on television, as applied to an animal rights organisation, did not violate freedom of expression. The Court divided nine votes to eight, with the majority opinion abandoning the Court’s previous ‘strict scrutiny’ review, and laying down a new doctrine for reviewing political advertising bans. This article, first, examines the role the composition of the Grand Chamber played in the outcome of the case. Second, questions the basis of the new doctrine of review. And third, criticises the majority’s treatment of precedent.

Broadcasting law, European Convention on Human Rights, Freedom of expression, Grondrechten, Parliamentary deference, Political advertising, Political speech, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Political Advertising Bans and Freedom of Expression}, author = {Fahy, R.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1534.pdf}, year = {0414}, date = {2015-04-14}, journal = {Greek Public Law Journal}, abstract = {In Animal Defenders International v UK, the 17-judge Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK’s ban on political advertising on television, as applied to an animal rights organisation, did not violate freedom of expression. The Court divided nine votes to eight, with the majority opinion abandoning the Court’s previous ‘strict scrutiny’ review, and laying down a new doctrine for reviewing political advertising bans. This article, first, examines the role the composition of the Grand Chamber played in the outcome of the case. Second, questions the basis of the new doctrine of review. And third, criticises the majority’s treatment of precedent.}, keywords = {Broadcasting law, European Convention on Human Rights, Freedom of expression, Grondrechten, Parliamentary deference, Political advertising, Political speech, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }

Google Spain v. González: Did the Court forget about freedom of expression? external link

Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. & Kulk, S.
European Journal of Risk Regulation, num: 3, 2014

Abstract

In this note we discuss the controversial judgment in Google Spain v. González of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Our focus is on the judgment’s implications for freedom of expression. First, the facts of the case and the CJEU’s judgment are summarised. We then argue that the CJEU did not give enough attention to the right to freedom of expression. By seeing a search engine operator as a controller regarding the processing of personal data on third party web pages, the CJEU assigns the operator the delicate task of balancing the fundamental rights at stake. However, such an operator may not be the most appropriate party to balance the rights of all involved parties, in particular in cases where such a balance is hard to strike. Furthermore, it is a departure from human rights doctrine that according to the CJEU privacy and data protection rights override, “as a rule”, the public’s right to receive information. In addition, after the judgement it has become unclear whether search engine operators have a legal basis for indexing websites that contain special categories of data. We also discuss steps taken by Google to comply with the judgment.

Data protection, Freedom of expression, Grondrechten, intermediary liability, Privacy, right to be forgotten, search engines, Vrijheid van meningsuiting

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Google Spain v. González: Did the Court forget about freedom of expression?}, author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and Kulk, S.}, url = {http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2491486}, year = {1030}, date = {2014-10-30}, journal = {European Journal of Risk Regulation}, number = {3}, abstract = {In this note we discuss the controversial judgment in Google Spain v. González of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Our focus is on the judgment’s implications for freedom of expression. First, the facts of the case and the CJEU’s judgment are summarised. We then argue that the CJEU did not give enough attention to the right to freedom of expression. By seeing a search engine operator as a controller regarding the processing of personal data on third party web pages, the CJEU assigns the operator the delicate task of balancing the fundamental rights at stake. However, such an operator may not be the most appropriate party to balance the rights of all involved parties, in particular in cases where such a balance is hard to strike. Furthermore, it is a departure from human rights doctrine that according to the CJEU privacy and data protection rights override, “as a rule”, the public’s right to receive information. In addition, after the judgement it has become unclear whether search engine operators have a legal basis for indexing websites that contain special categories of data. We also discuss steps taken by Google to comply with the judgment.}, keywords = {Data protection, Freedom of expression, Grondrechten, intermediary liability, Privacy, right to be forgotten, search engines, Vrijheid van meningsuiting}, }