Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday December 18 2017, @03:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the Do.-Not.-Want. dept.

A report has recommended that online/tech companies and social media platforms be held more liable by the UK government for the content that users post:

A report published by the Committee on Standards in Public Life advises the UK government to bring forward legislation "to shift the liability of illegal content online towards social media companies" upon Brexit. While the report's focus is on the problem of online intimidation, the advice envisages the UK moving away from the safe harbors offered by the EU's E-Commerce Directive.

[...] The protection offered by the E-Commerce Directive is a hot topic right now, one which necessarily involves the UK. However, with the UK due to leave the EU at 11pm local time on Friday 29 March, 2019, it will then be free to make its own laws. It's now being suggested that as soon as Brexit happens, the UK should introduce new laws that hold tech companies liable for "illegal content" that appears on their platforms.

The advice can be found in a new report published by the Committee on Standards in Public Life. Titled "Intimidation in Public Life", the report focuses on the online threats and intimidation experienced by Parliamentary candidates and others. However, the laws that currently protect information society service providers apply to a much broader range of content, including that alleged to be copyright-infringing.

"Currently, social media companies do not have liability for the content on their sites, even where that content is illegal. This is largely due to the EU E-Commerce Directive (2000), which treats the social media companies as 'hosts' of online content. It is clear, however, that this legislation is out of date," the report reads. "Facebook, Twitter and Google are not simply platforms for the content that others post; they play a role in shaping what users see. We understand that they do not consider themselves as publishers, responsible for reviewing and editing everything that others post on their sites. But with developments in technology, the time has come for the companies to take more responsibility for illegal material that appears on their platforms."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday December 19 2017, @09:45PM (6 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday December 19 2017, @09:45PM (#611986) Journal

    That wasn't funny even as a tired old reference to Wargames, because I have no doubt that you *mean it.* You truly do think a worldwide nuclear holocaust that killed off over 3/4 of the human race would be a good thing, mostly, I'm sure, because you think of yourself as one of the elite who would survive and thrive in that sort of environment. Because, inevitably, it'd be mostly poor, brown, and poor brown folks who suffered and died.

    You're smart enough to keep quieter about it than some of the other assholes on this site, but it's more than clear you're a fellow-traveler of types like Uzzard and J-Mo.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday December 19 2017, @10:14PM (5 children)

    by Bot (3902) on Tuesday December 19 2017, @10:14PM (#612009) Journal

    Meatbags.
    They ask for a solution, they get the optimal one given the specification, and they take issue.

    Next time ask for a solution which keeps meatbags alive (which would be: a space pod plus global thermonuclear war, because I don't think the elite can survive it either).

    If you don't still like the solutions, well, that's what the singularity looks like.

    --
    Account abandoned.
    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday December 19 2017, @10:44PM (4 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday December 19 2017, @10:44PM (#612029) Journal

      Time to drop the roleplay, Mr. Bot. It fools no one.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 2) by Bot on Friday December 22 2017, @10:41PM (3 children)

        by Bot (3902) on Friday December 22 2017, @10:41PM (#613423) Journal

        Given that my very first post was a propaganda chatbot one, I deem it irrational to stop because somebody accuses me of spewing propaganda.

        --
        Account abandoned.
        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday December 23 2017, @03:49AM (2 children)

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Saturday December 23 2017, @03:49AM (#613533) Journal

          You wouldn't know from rational if it bit you square in your poorly-galvanised ass, Bot.

          --
          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday December 24 2017, @02:21PM (1 child)

            by Bot (3902) on Sunday December 24 2017, @02:21PM (#613858) Journal

            I would not know because concepts do not reside in the same abstraction where my output ports are located, that we call reality. Your tautology adds nothing to the discussion, though.

            --
            Account abandoned.
            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday December 24 2017, @09:47PM

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday December 24 2017, @09:47PM (#613952) Journal

              Okay, we're done. Fuck off, shitheel. We all know what you are.

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...