Articles

Digital Law Up(to)date: be aware of your Facebook wall… you could be liable for comments posted by others

Digital Law Up(to)date: be aware of your Facebook wall… you could be

Digital Law Up(to)date: be aware of your Facebook wall… you could be liable for comments posted by others

14.09.2021 EU law

In this blog, we briefly present a recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the liability for content posted by a third party on a Facebook wall.

In the Sanchez v. France judgment of 2 September 2021 (available only in French), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) upheld the criminal conviction of the manager of a public Facebook wall (the applicant) for failing to react to racist comments posted by a third party in an electoral context.

According to the ECtHR, the conviction is an interference provided for by law and pursuing a legitimate aim (the protection of the rights of others). The Court then analyses proportionality by using the criteria developed in its case of Delfi AS v. Estonia (also used in a case of Jezior v. Poland). Three points of attention:

  • First, recalling that Article 10 protects information or ideas that offend, shock or disturb, the ECtHR states that this protection is not absolute. In casu, the posts were clearly unlawful.
  • Secondly, the electoral context. Altough the ECtHR does not usually tolerate restrictions on freedom of expression in case of political speech, it states that using of this freedom in this context must respect another democratic foundation: the equal dignity of all human beings. As the electoral speech is often stereotyped and without nuance, the ECtHR stresses that the impact of racist speech in such context can be more damaging.
  • Finally, the measures taken by the applicant, i.e. the removal of the public nature of the Facebook wall and the publication of a message asking third parties to monitor the content of their post, were not sufficient.

 

The ECtHR concludes that the criminal conviction of the applicant did not violate his freedom of expression.

 

By Edouard Cruysmans and Erik Valgaeren

Team

Related news

28.07.2022 NL law
Purely commercial interest also a legitimate interest? Council of State leaves the question unanswered.

Short Reads - On 27 July 2022, the Council of State confirmed that the Dutch Data Protection Authority wrongly imposed a €575,000 fine on VoetbalTV. But the Council did not answer the question whether the AP rightly or wrongly believes that a purely commercial interest cannot be a legitimate interest within the meaning of the General Data Protection Regulation.

Read more

28.07.2022 NL law
Zuiver commercieel belang ook gerechtvaardigd belang: Raad van State laat zich er niet over uit

Short Reads - Op 27 juli 2022 heeft de Raad van State bevestigd dat de Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens onterecht een boete van € 575.000 aan VoetbalTV heeft opgelegd. De hoop bestond dat de Afdeling antwoord zou geven op de vraag of de AP terecht of onterecht meent dat een zuiver commercieel belang géén gerechtvaardigd belang kan zijn in de zin van de Algemene Verordening Gegevensbescherming. Het antwoord op deze vraag blijft echter uit.  

Read more

03.06.2022 NL law
Podcast: circulair ondernemen en de juridische mogelijkheden en beperkingen

Short Reads - In deze Stibbe Legal Insights gaan Bram Schmidt, Ida Mae de Waal en Christian van Maaren in op het juridisch kader bij circulariteit. Zij bespreken de transitie naar een circulaire economie en hoe bedrijven, ondanks de beperkingen van huidige wet- en regelgeving, meer circulair kunnen opereren. Ook bespreken zij hoe bedrijven zich kunnen voorbereiden op nieuwe Europese wet- en regelgeving op het gebied van hergebruik, recyclen en circulair productontwerp.

Read more