The (Federal Supreme Court) decided to expand the obligations of social networking platforms to act in Brazil. From now on, they will be civilly responsible if they do not proactively remove, before court order, a new list of content, including undemocratic, discriminatory or incitement to crimes.
The board presented on Thursday (26) the final thesis of the trial on the, after deciding, by 8 votes to 3, to increase the responsibility of the Big Techs for content published by users.
The majority current understood that the text in force today is insufficient to protect fundamental rights on the internet.
Although there was already a majority, it was necessary to make an agreement around the text, as there were disagreements between the magistrates about its amplitude, the moment and the cases in which companies must be held responsible.
The collegiate gathered at a lunch that began before 1 pm and continued until 4:30 pm, when the STF session began.
The debate was around Article 19 of the Internet Civil Marco, in force since 2014 and says that platforms should only compensate users offended by third party posts if they fail to comply with court order to remove content.
There were 8 votes for the expansion of obligations, the rapporteurs and, besides ,,, and.
Already, and voted against the change in article 19.
The Court has defined that platforms are responsible for removing content that configures serious crimes such as undemocratic conduct and acts, terrorism crimes or terrorism preparatory, crimes of induction, instigation or assistance to suicide or self -harm, incitement to discrimination, crimes committed against women, sexual crimes, children and serious crimes against children and children and children teenagers.
The decision also includes liability of providers in the event of illicit content when there are advertisements and probationary or robot use. But the platforms will be exempt if they prove that they have active in reasonable time to make the content unavailable.
At another point of conclusion, the ministers devoted an excerpt from the decision to deal with the presence of legal representative in Brazil of companies that work in the national territory.
Minister Alexandre de Moraes was involved in clashes with the X (former Twitter) and Rumble precisely for the absence of legal representatives of these companies in the country and the breach of orders given by him.
According to the decision, the legal representation of the big techs must be able to respond to the administrative and judicial spheres; Provide information on its operation, rules and procedures for content moderation and management of complaints by internal systems, user profile, advertising, and paid content drive, as well as complying with judicial determinations.
The exception was the crimes against honor, because in these cases the withdrawal of the requirement could compromise the protection of freedom of expression. These situations will continue to demand court decision so that the non -removal implies accountability of social networks.
This rule also follows valid for video or voice closed meetings, instant messaging and email meetings. Marketplaces should observe the rules of the Consumer Protection Code.
Platforms should also edit a self -regulation that necessarily covers a system of notification, due process and annual transparency reports regarding extrajudicial notifications, ads and driving.
At this point, the ministers were debating the idea of systemic failure of the platforms. Now the concept has been defined how to fail to adopt preventive or removal measures of the illicit content listed.
Even in the cases for which the rule of art. 19, ministers understand that social networking providers should remove publications with identical content to those who have already been the subject of previous court decisions.
The magistrates said it was necessary a mechanism for content that already had court decision attesting to the criminal content cannot be published either.
The thesis prepared by the STF has an excerpt still with a “appeal to the legislator”. “It appears to the National Congress to prepare legislation capable of remedying the deficiencies of the current regime regarding the protection of fundamental rights.”
The House of Representatives in 2023 the process of the Fake News, which would address the regulation of the themes.
At the formal opening of Thursday’s session, after lunch in which the magistrates debated the final text, Kassio Nunes Marques said he made a defense of freedom of expression and stated that the solution to the questions would not be the prior restriction on this right.
“When there is a dissent of ideas that the guarantee of freedom of expression is more necessary. It is precisely through this free debate of ideas that society tends to develop,” he said.
He defended the maintenance of Big Techs accountability only after court order. He thus adhered to the divergence of the court that is most favorable to the platforms. The position was overcome, along with Mendonça and Fachin.
Kassio’s vote was the last of the case, which had already formed a majority for the expansion of Big Techs obligations by content published by third parties.
The minister said he understood conveniently that Congress addresses the matter. Since the beginning of the discussion, the president of the court, Luis Roberto Barroso, emphasized that the.
“The court awaited for a very reasonable period the survival of legislation by the legislature and, not happening, it is time to decide this matter,” he said in the first session of the case.
The president again mentioned the theme at this Thursday’s session. This was one of the cases that Barroso had a desire to guide and conclude during his presidency, which ends in September.
This Thursday, the plenary did the last of 11 sessions dedicated to the theme. The first of these was last November, when the ministers listened to the support of the case. The first two sessions were destined to the vote of one of the rapporteurs.
HAS Sheet The president of Brazil, Fábio Coelho, said, child exploitation and terrorism in the exceptions of Article 19. The idea aligns with.
Rabbit warns, however, to the “unwanted consequences” if there is. “Depending on how this update in Article 19, this can make us a little less participants in all discussions that occur in Brazil and lead us to remove more content in the country.”
