EU: take down illegal content (terror/hate speech) within 1 hour or face millions in fines

[Alpha1]

The European Commission proposed new rules on Wednesday that would require internet platforms to remove illegal terror content within an hour of it being flagged by national authorities. Firms could be fined up to 4% of global annual revenue if they repeatedly fail to comply.

"You wouldn't get away with handing out fliers inciting terrorism on the streets of our cities — and it shouldn't be possible to do it on the internet, either," EU security commissioner Julian King said in a statement.

The proposal is the latest in a series of European efforts to regulate the activities of tech companies. EU data protection rules that came into effect in May have already changed how companies around the world collect and handle personal data.

The terror content proposal needs to be approved by the European Parliament and EU member states before becoming law.

The proposal from the Commission is similar to the model used by Germany.

Authorities there have the power to fine social media platforms as much as €50 million ($60 million) if they fail to quickly remove hate speech. None of the big tech companies have yet been fined under that law, which came into effect in January.

Read more: https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/12/technology/online-terrorist-content-eu/index.html

 

[mysiteguy]

Seems they are doing everything they can to drive companies off the European Internet.

 

[Alpha1]

1 hour response time is completely ridiculous. Maybe we should switch to 50 minute naps. I'm hoping this initiative will become some less unreasonable.

 

[Alpha1]

EU Continues To Kill The Open Web: Massive Fines For Sites That Don't Censor Within An Hour
from the what-the-hell-is-going-on-in-brussels? dept

The EU really seems quite hellbent on absolutely destroying the open internet. Just as the EU Parliament was voting to approve the EU Copyright Directive, requiring that much of the internet be licensed and curated, rather than open for anyone, the EU Commission decided to move forward with an awful idea that it had first proposed earlier this year: that social media companies must disappear "terrorist content' within one hour.

Back when this was proposed, we pointed out how this was holding companies to an absolutely impossible standard... and it appears that the EU really just doesn't give a ****, because they're super excited about putting this into practice:


The European Commission proposed new rules on Wednesday that would require internet platforms to remove illegal terror content within an hour of it being flagged by national authorities. Firms could be fined up to 4% of global annual revenue if they repeatedly fail to comply.

Got that? 4% of global revenue. As the article notes, that means if Google ****s up a single download, it could owe $4.4 billion to the EU. Facebook could owe $1.6 billion.


More here: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...ines-sites-that-dont-censor-within-hour.shtml

 

[mysiteguy]

I'm not into conspiracy theories but if I were I'd suggest that someone must be paying off the people who vote on this to pass everything they can to scare certain social media companies out of Europe. Now, I don't think that's the case, but there must be some underlying reason they keep doing these stupid sort of things.

 

[KimmiKat]

Hope that don't happen in NA. It's getting ridiculous.

 

[Banxix]

I just laugh so hard on 4% of global revenue. What do they want.

 

[Alpha1]

Hope that don't happen in NA. It's getting ridiculous.

There are initiatives in the USA senate, but nothing definitive yet:
US Senate threatens laws on disinformation, hate speech, fake accounts, data protection

 

[TrixieTang]

View attachment 51618

That's wrong. All our base are belong to EU.

 

[Shimei]

How will they find "terrorist" if they require taking down hate speech? Seems to me that they are working against their main source of intelligence. Hate speech is sometimes a deeper indicator or a mark of someone dangerous. The KKK, Skin Heads, Neo Nazis, Extremist Islamist etc.

Then again, evidence suggest that the EU actually doesn't care about terrorism. Either that or they really are pretty naive. They must be following the logic that if we don't see or hear about it then it doesn't exists! Here's an example:

Video from Germany: Muslim migrant beheads 1-year-old girl, Merkel bans media reporting

The hypocrisy of the EU is rather hilarious. Ban guns, knives, and now "hate" speech. That'll solve the issue. Speak out against terrorism and I'm sure they'll ban you too! They, like past examples will call you a bigot and recommend that if you're against the ideology or false religion that spreads it then you should leave! Last I heard they were banning cars and trucks from in front of certain law buildings because terrorist of all things started mowing down people in vehicles.

After all, guns, knives, vehicles and even the internet are the problem. In prison these things don't exists and we know they are the safest place to live!

 

[Karll]

I guess I'll just make the EU a moderator on my board, with privileges to soft-delete posts, problem solved?

 

[mysiteguy]

Then again, evidence suggest that the EU actually doesn't care about terrorism. Either that or they really are pretty naive. They must be following the logic that if we don't see or hear about it then it doesn't exists! Here's an example:

Video from Germany: Muslim migrant beheads 1-year-old girl, Merkel bans media reporting

The hypocrisy of the EU is rather hilarious.

Germany never banned reporting of this incident. Quite the oppositive, the story was widely reported by the Germany media. This BS story was started by yournewswire.com, a known fake news site that ran stories such as the Queen was going to abdicate if Brexit didn't pass. A bunch of (mostly far right) sites others copied it.

The USA has also banned parking in front of many different federal buildings for a long time (since before 9/11). I couldn't park on a street one block over from my hosting company's data center because a federal building is there.

 

[/dev/urandon]

but there must be some underlying reason they keep doing these stupid sort of things.

It's called censorship, they're trying to put a genie back in the bottle.

 

[Nev_Dull]

I'm actually fine with this proposed legislation. The point of it, as I see it, is to prevent terrorist organizations from using the internet and especially social media to spread their message, which is a good thing.

Once you get past the gut reaction to the one hour time limit, you can see that one hour on the internet is a long time for information. The large social media sites where people are most likely to encounter this content are generally staffed at all times, so that shouldn't be a problem. The legislation is more concerned with preventing or removing the content than fining people, so smaller sites, like forums should be fine, providing they act as soon as the content is discovered or reported.

 

[Alpha1]

Please mind that this is not just about terrorism, but about all illegal content including hate speech, copyright, abuse.
While they can make a case for terrorism and this is mentioned in the current non-binding law many times, there are many other issues that this law addresses. hate speech, harassment, slander, insult, copyright, etc, etc.
The current non-binding law can be found here:
https://xenforo.com/community/threa...erate-illegal-hate-speech.127828/post-1276969

The upcoming binding law will replace it and it remains to be seen what it will entail exactly but it is very likely that this will be about any content that is illegal somewhere. Which is as vague as can be.

 

[Nev_Dull]

One could reasonably argue, though, that if content is illegal, is should, by definition be dealt with under the law.

 

[Alpha1]

Incitement, hate speech, copyright breaches, slaunder, insult, and a bunch of other things are illegal but occur frequently on forums and social media. The normal way to deal with it for moderated forums is to handle it if encountered or if reported. And let moderators consider if it falls within the boundaries of the rules. With millions in fines, threat to loose hosting and the requirement to handle it within an hour this changes things and admins may want to err on the side of caution, which has a chilling effect.

Additionally there are requirements to implement functionality and tools to detect and manage illegal content. Forum software is not equipped to identify problematic content. The best there is is a report function which is pretty much the same as it was 10-15 years ago. it will not do.

 

[Nev_Dull]

The best tool for identifying and managing illegal content is the human brain. What's needed isn't another bit of software, it's a deeper understanding of what is and isn't acceptable content, and a staff that is trained to deal with it.

This is just another step in the process of the internet growing up. The same thing happened with what we now call traditional media, going from a free-for-all, publish anything to sell papers to a mature media subject to a regulated system of checks and balances that tries to ensure what gets printed is accurate and factually correct. As legislation like this is adopted in more places, it will change the way we run our sites. Some will go away, as did many of the small, spurious paper publications. Those that adapt will continue.

 

[dynamite]

4% of $0 global revenue... I think I’m ok

 

[Alpha1]

Or a few million whichever is higher.