The (Supreme Federal Court) resumes this Thursday (28) the analysis of cases involving the Marco Civil da and the possibility of holding social media platforms responsible for third-party content.
The court began the analysis on Wednesday (27) and only heard the lawyers’ oral arguments. Now, the other representatives of entities registered in the process must speak. Then the ministers begin to vote.
The regulation of digital activity is similar to what was being discussed in the context of , which ended up being blocked.
Understand the debate on the Marco Civil da Internet and the regulation of social networks in the Supreme Court:
What is the debate about the regulation of social networks?
The STF began judging cases that question sections of the Marco Civil and the possibility of holding platforms responsible for content published by third parties, such as their users; the president of the court, minister, says that the analysis takes place after the topic.
What is the Marco Civil da Internet?
It is a law with rights and duties for the use of the internet in the country. Article 19 of the framework, the main one to be discussed by the court, exempts platforms from liability for damages generated by third-party content, that is, they are only subject to paying compensation, for example, if they do not comply with a court order to removal.
What is the discussion about this article?
At the time, the rule was approved with the concern of ensuring freedom of expression. One of the justifications is that networks would be encouraged to remove legitimate content for fear of being held responsible; on the other hand, critics say the rule discourages companies from combating harmful content.
What has the Supreme Court signaled on the matter?
Under reservation, members of the STF state that the most likely path to be adopted is the definition that networks have a “duty of care” — when platforms must remove criminal content without the need for a court decision.
What has impacted the analysis of the case?
The current political tension in the country has influenced the discourse of judges when speaking out about the Marco Civil and the regulation of social networks. After the series of false content about electronic voting machines, the and the recent , the Supreme Court sees the case as a priority.
Are there any proposals in the Legislature on the subject?
Until April 9, Congress was discussing the PL das , which also established the duty of care for platforms; it was stuck after opposition from big techs and threats to congressmen. The President of the House, (-AL), decided that the text would be re-discussed from scratch, but the debates have not yet started.
How does network regulation work in other countries?
The legislation immunizes platforms for third-party content, and also does not hold companies responsible if content is removed in good faith; the text was created to prevent social networks from being sued for any content posted. Now, projects and actions in court are discussing increasing the responsibility of platforms.
The bloc’s set of laws establishes that networks can only be held responsible for third-party content if they know of its existence and do not remove it, that is, it is only necessary to remove the publication, for example, if they receive a report from a user and do not act . Furthermore, there are a series of obligations that must be fulfilled by platforms, such as transparency reports, and demonstration of harmful content removed.
A proposal approved in October 2023 defines that platforms will have a “duty of care” to remove illegal content even before receiving complaints; Companies need to ensure their own terms of use are enforced, and users have the right to appeal moderation decisions.
