By 8 votes to 3, Supreme expands Big Techs accountability for content published by its users
The manifested concern after the (Supreme Federal Court), on Thursday (26.Jun.2025), by contents published by its users.
In a press release sent to Poder360, The technology company pointed out that changes in the application of legislation “can impact freedom of expression and the digital economy ”.
The tone of Google’s statement was similar to, owner of the and the. Mark Zuckerberg’s company also stated that change has legal uncertainties and consequences for freedom of expression.
Before the trial, Google had already stated that, depending on the decision of the Court, its performance in Brazil.
“Over the past few months, Google has manifesting its concerns about change that can impact freedom of expression and the digital economy”wrote to big techin the statement of Thursday (26.jun).
“We are analyzing the approved thesis, especially the expansion of removal cases upon notification (provided for in article 21), and the impacts on our products. We remain open to the dialogue”He added.
STF decision
The STF’s decision for the accountability of the companies took place with a score of 8 votes to 3.
The ministers have decided on cases where a court order is required to exclude content, occasions when a private notification and situations in which platforms must act on their own to prevent content from reaching public space from reaching.
The winning thesis recognized article 19 of the Internet Civil Marco (), which is the subject of the judgment in question, as partially unconstitutional.
This thesis has expanded the possibilities that social networks are eventually responsible.
Earlier, Article 19 functioned as a general rule: that is, for the removal of an air content, a court order was necessary. If this court order were not met, the platforms were held responsible. The exception was configured by Article 21: the withdrawal of content dispensed with a court decision in cases of unauthorized nudity.
Now, with the Supreme decision, Article 21 becomes the rule and article 19 to the exception. It will only be necessary court order to remove content in the cases of crime against honor (slander, defamation and injury).
For other crimes, platforms will be required to remove content as soon as they receive private notification for this purpose.
Here’s the final score of the trial:
- In favor of the thesis – 8 votes (Dias Toffoli, Luiz Fux, Alexandre de Moraes, Roberto Barroso, Flávio Dino, Cristiano Zanin, Gilmar Mendes and Carmen Lúcia);
- and against the thesis – 3 votes (André Mendonça, Edson Fachin and Nunes Marques).
The proposal was the result of a consensus achieved at a lunch among all 11 ministers before the plenary session began at the Court’s chairmanship.
Throughout the trial, which began in December 2024, the ministers presented different theses.
Each brought different proposals on the types of posts that would be considered unlawful, where the platforms should act on their own initiative, what the duties of the platforms or which body would be responsible for overseeing compliance with the established measures.
Read more:
