Corporate responsibility and Government’s sphere of competence – droit des technologies de l’information. Rapport ”Filtrage d’Internet – Equilibrer les réponses à la cybercriminalité dans une société démocratique” 20 May 2010. A report in French on filtering a year ago.

To be put in perspective with the conclusions of the Advocate General before the ECJ on 14 April 2011, case C70/10 on the prejudicial question formed by the CA Brussels. A summary in English is available on the Business and Human Rights website. The conclusions are rather damning for Governments’ policies (or lack of policies that have the same results) to filter the internet generally and per se for copyrights purposes.

Para. 68: the Advocate General considers that for a judge to order a ISP to filter all communications indefinitely in order to fight piracy is not a measure that complies with the principle of legality. There are clear limitations to the exercise of fundamental rights (para. 87) which do not comply with the Charter and the ECHR (para. 115) because the measure is preventive, too general, and taken by a judge.

see also, outside Europe, “Telcos, social media sites get a conscience call” 25 February, The business Standard (India)

About Audrey Guinchard

Senior Lecturer @ University of Essex (UK)
This entry was posted in censorship, Corporate Responsibility. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s