6 ms·

France law on social networks not waiting for the DSA debate at EU level

53 points by zoobab 6y ago

olouv 6y ago
This link https://www.nextinpact.com/article/45417/plateformes-et-moteurs-projet-damendement-gouvernement https://www.nextinpact.com/article/45417/plateformes-et-mote... gives a bit more insight into this "rush" to transcribe a possible future EU law into national law. It looks like the French government want to leverage the Trump/conservatives global de-platforming to push for new regulation on the US web super giants. Interestingly, both French ministers (economy and digital) severely condemned the "unilateral" and "oligarchic" decision to de-platform Tump and conservatives. Pointing the lack of "judiciary or democratic supervision". I think it is a smart move, Europe should clearly push for a sovereign alternative for these global-scale utility-like medium of communication. There is too much at stake.
- _trampeltier 6y ago
  What now ?!?, since one or two years, the EU forced social network to remove problematic content in less then 24 hours.
  - dagw 6y ago
    EU forced social network to remove problematic content in less then 24 hours. They're in no way against censoring speech. They just want courts and governments to hold the monopoly over censoring speech.
    - johnchristopher 6y ago
      It's verbatim what Belgium 's prime minister recently said."It's not up to Twitter or Facebook to decide what can be said or not. It's up to judges.".
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  > Interestingly, both French ministers (economy and digital) severely condemned the "unilateral" and "oligarchic" decision to de-platform Tump and conservatives. Pointing the lack of "judiciary or democratic supervision". They are afraid that eventually, Twitter or Facebook is going to remove their conservative speech, if it rubs Twitter or Facebook employees the wrong way, and they'd be right. That's exactly what is going to happen. But I'd argue, why are they still flocking to thus promoting these platforms at first place? Promote open techs, open protocols so that anybody with any client can subscribe to their messages without being forced to go on Twitter and co... it exists, it's called RSS, ActivePub... the tools of freedom are here and they don't take much effort at all. edit: I feel like people are missing my point or maybe I didn't expressed it very well. Twitter and Facebook should be entitled to ban whomever they want on their platform, that's not the point. The point is governments and politicians should start promoting open protocols and technologies for communication instead of voting law for fear of getting their 'conservative' speech banned by these platforms they decided to speak on, often exclusively. That's all I'm saying.
  - Daho0n 6y ago
    >They are afraid that eventually, Twitter or Facebook is going to remove their conservative speech Have they (and who are they? The ministers? Every Frenchmen alive?) said this themselves or are you spreading FUD? Censoring speech is "removing something he said". France and Germany are for this. Censoring people is "removing a person because of what he said". France and Germany are both against this. Of course Facebook and Twitter take the easy way out instead of the ethical one.
  - dagw 6y ago
    is going to remove their conservative speech No has ever been kicked off Twitter for claiming that their left wing opponent's tax plan will have unintended consequences that can lead to long term slowdown of GDP growth or that a minimum wage increase will lead to higher unemployment.
  - littlestymaar 6y ago
    > Twitter or Facebook is going to remove their conservative speech, if it rubs Twitter or Facebook employees the wrong way It's not what happened and it has nothing to do with Facebook or twitter employees (who have almost zero power, they haven't even unionized yet!). Facebook or Twitter could have banned Trump & al. for content policy violation years ago (and they probably should have actually, because you know, policy violation) but they did not because conservatives were in charge and then had power to retaliate. Now they are banning them now, because now the democrats are in charge, and they are definitely going to retaliate hadn't social network ban Trump. American social networks will do things which don't annoy the American government too much, so it leave them alone. What's happening here, is European govts wanting the same level of power than the US one.
- op03 6y ago
  They just have to mandate turning of the Like Count (and other half baked signaling). Things will revert to the old internet.
grenoire 6y ago
Anybody has an English (or French) resource detailing its contents?
- _notreallyme_ 6y ago
  Well, obviously a french version is easy to find : https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/amendements/3649/CSPRINCREP/1770 https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/amendements/3649/C...
- niea_11 6y ago
  The DSA proposal in english : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52020PC0825&from=en https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... And a short presentation here : https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-services-act-ensuring-safe-and-accountable-online-environment_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/euro...
  - pjc50 6y ago
    That's a very long document, but skipping to the Articles it looks like they're planning to put in a "section 230" style explicit liability shield.
    - niea_11 6y ago
      The link I posted is to the DSA proposal which will be on the european level. The article discusses a new french law that tries to "backport" (if I understood correctly) the DSA changes into the french legislation to skip the time needed for DSA to be discussed and finalized on the european level. And doing a quick CTRL+F in the DSA proposal I found a section which I think is similar to "section 230". The proposal maintains the liability rules for providers of intermediary services set out in the e-Commerce Directive – by now established as a foundation of the digital economy and instrumental to the protection of fundamental rights online. Those rules have been interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union, thus providing valuable clarifications and guidance. Nevertheless, to ensure an effective harmonisation across the Union and avoid legal fragmentation, it is necessary to include those rules in a Regulation. It is also appropriate to clarify some aspects of those rules to eliminate existing disincentives towards voluntary own-investigations undertaken by providers of intermediary services to ensure their users’ safety and to clarify their role from the perspective of consumers in certain circumstances. Those clarifications should help smaller, innovative providers scale up and grow by benefitting from greater legal certainty. So something similar to section 230 already exists in EU legislation.
orange_tee 6y ago
Facebook are too greedy. They take take take and never give anything back. It is not good for their presence in other countries. You have to give the host some reason to want to keep you around. But these people at Facebook think they can go to a completely foreign market, setup shop, take over a huge chunk of the advertising industry, become an influential media platform overshadowing local media outlets, and they do that while employing barely any locals and avoiding taxes too boot. I name Facebook but this is probably true of other US tech giants too. Point is, this is not a symbiotic relationship. It is no wonder the EU are not happy.
- gabereiser 6y ago
  It’s not even symbiotic here in the US. Facebook has a history of employing a few individuals to navigate the foreign market and then just go all in. No understanding of the local customs. See Facebook vs Myanmar. Facebook turned a blind eye to neo-nazi’s because engagement was up. Facebook is a cancer.
  - A_non_e-moose 6y ago
    Facebook only maximizes profit to shareholders. Destroy Facebook and other corporation will come back to do some morally questionable or society-breaking process that maximizes profit to shareholders. The economic model of our society is the root of the problem. That is much more complex and difficult to solve or even just to talk about. It saddens me that society's trend in fast paced, low attention, immediate gratification, and devaluation or intellectual disinterest of the humanities disciplines like philosophy, politics, economics, is making it so much harder to tackle this governance and societal problem. More or different tech is not a solution.
    - mrmonkeyman 6y ago
      Exactly. The system favors, even actively promotes, certain dynamics which lead to predictable results. I have faith in humanity though. They will eventually, slowly, converge on a new optimum. Probably under the stress of painful and certain extinction, but that's just a detail.
Reventlov 6y ago
Main problem is that while the DSA is still not voted, you don't really know what will be in the text, and the old texts still apply. So, for some time, French law could be in opposition with European law. Good thing Thierry Breton is the European Commissioner for Internal Market.
dang 6y ago
Submissions to HN need to be in English. We have deep respect for la belle langue and other languages, but HN is an English-language site. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=english%20language%20site%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

53 points by zoobab 6y ago

This link https://www.nextinpact.com/article/45417/plateformes-et-moteurs-projet-damendement-gouvernement https://www.nextinpact.com/article/45417/plateformes-et-mote... gives a bit more insight into this "rush" to transcribe a possible future EU law into national law. It looks like the French government want to leverage the Trump/conservatives global de-platforming to push for new regulation on the US web super giants. Interestingly, both French ministers (economy and digital) severely condemned the "unilateral" and "oligarchic" decision to de-platform Tump and conservatives. Pointing the lack of "judiciary or democratic supervision". I think it is a smart move, Europe should clearly push for a sovereign alternative for these global-scale utility-like medium of communication. There is too much at stake.

_trampeltier 6y ago
What now ?!?, since one or two years, the EU forced social network to remove problematic content in less then 24 hours.
- dagw 6y ago
  EU forced social network to remove problematic content in less then 24 hours. They're in no way against censoring speech. They just want courts and governments to hold the monopoly over censoring speech.
  - johnchristopher 6y ago
    It's verbatim what Belgium 's prime minister recently said."It's not up to Twitter or Facebook to decide what can be said or not. It's up to judges.".
throw_m239339 6y ago
> Interestingly, both French ministers (economy and digital) severely condemned the "unilateral" and "oligarchic" decision to de-platform Tump and conservatives. Pointing the lack of "judiciary or democratic supervision". They are afraid that eventually, Twitter or Facebook is going to remove their conservative speech, if it rubs Twitter or Facebook employees the wrong way, and they'd be right. That's exactly what is going to happen. But I'd argue, why are they still flocking to thus promoting these platforms at first place? Promote open techs, open protocols so that anybody with any client can subscribe to their messages without being forced to go on Twitter and co... it exists, it's called RSS, ActivePub... the tools of freedom are here and they don't take much effort at all. edit: I feel like people are missing my point or maybe I didn't expressed it very well. Twitter and Facebook should be entitled to ban whomever they want on their platform, that's not the point. The point is governments and politicians should start promoting open protocols and technologies for communication instead of voting law for fear of getting their 'conservative' speech banned by these platforms they decided to speak on, often exclusively. That's all I'm saying.
- Daho0n 6y ago
  >They are afraid that eventually, Twitter or Facebook is going to remove their conservative speech Have they (and who are they? The ministers? Every Frenchmen alive?) said this themselves or are you spreading FUD? Censoring speech is "removing something he said". France and Germany are for this. Censoring people is "removing a person because of what he said". France and Germany are both against this. Of course Facebook and Twitter take the easy way out instead of the ethical one.
- dagw 6y ago
  is going to remove their conservative speech No has ever been kicked off Twitter for claiming that their left wing opponent's tax plan will have unintended consequences that can lead to long term slowdown of GDP growth or that a minimum wage increase will lead to higher unemployment.
- littlestymaar 6y ago
  > Twitter or Facebook is going to remove their conservative speech, if it rubs Twitter or Facebook employees the wrong way It's not what happened and it has nothing to do with Facebook or twitter employees (who have almost zero power, they haven't even unionized yet!). Facebook or Twitter could have banned Trump & al. for content policy violation years ago (and they probably should have actually, because you know, policy violation) but they did not because conservatives were in charge and then had power to retaliate. Now they are banning them now, because now the democrats are in charge, and they are definitely going to retaliate hadn't social network ban Trump. American social networks will do things which don't annoy the American government too much, so it leave them alone. What's happening here, is European govts wanting the same level of power than the US one.
op03 6y ago
They just have to mandate turning of the Like Count (and other half baked signaling). Things will revert to the old internet.

grenoire 6y ago

Anybody has an English (or French) resource detailing its contents?

_notreallyme_ 6y ago
Well, obviously a french version is easy to find : https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/amendements/3649/CSPRINCREP/1770 https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/amendements/3649/C...
niea_11 6y ago
The DSA proposal in english : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52020PC0825&from=en https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... And a short presentation here : https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-services-act-ensuring-safe-and-accountable-online-environment_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/euro...
- pjc50 6y ago
  That's a very long document, but skipping to the Articles it looks like they're planning to put in a "section 230" style explicit liability shield.
  - niea_11 6y ago
    The link I posted is to the DSA proposal which will be on the european level. The article discusses a new french law that tries to "backport" (if I understood correctly) the DSA changes into the french legislation to skip the time needed for DSA to be discussed and finalized on the european level. And doing a quick CTRL+F in the DSA proposal I found a section which I think is similar to "section 230". The proposal maintains the liability rules for providers of intermediary services set out in the e-Commerce Directive – by now established as a foundation of the digital economy and instrumental to the protection of fundamental rights online. Those rules have been interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union, thus providing valuable clarifications and guidance. Nevertheless, to ensure an effective harmonisation across the Union and avoid legal fragmentation, it is necessary to include those rules in a Regulation. It is also appropriate to clarify some aspects of those rules to eliminate existing disincentives towards voluntary own-investigations undertaken by providers of intermediary services to ensure their users’ safety and to clarify their role from the perspective of consumers in certain circumstances. Those clarifications should help smaller, innovative providers scale up and grow by benefitting from greater legal certainty. So something similar to section 230 already exists in EU legislation.

orange_tee 6y ago

Facebook are too greedy. They take take take and never give anything back. It is not good for their presence in other countries. You have to give the host some reason to want to keep you around. But these people at Facebook think they can go to a completely foreign market, setup shop, take over a huge chunk of the advertising industry, become an influential media platform overshadowing local media outlets, and they do that while employing barely any locals and avoiding taxes too boot. I name Facebook but this is probably true of other US tech giants too. Point is, this is not a symbiotic relationship. It is no wonder the EU are not happy.

gabereiser 6y ago
It’s not even symbiotic here in the US. Facebook has a history of employing a few individuals to navigate the foreign market and then just go all in. No understanding of the local customs. See Facebook vs Myanmar. Facebook turned a blind eye to neo-nazi’s because engagement was up. Facebook is a cancer.
- A_non_e-moose 6y ago
  Facebook only maximizes profit to shareholders. Destroy Facebook and other corporation will come back to do some morally questionable or society-breaking process that maximizes profit to shareholders. The economic model of our society is the root of the problem. That is much more complex and difficult to solve or even just to talk about. It saddens me that society's trend in fast paced, low attention, immediate gratification, and devaluation or intellectual disinterest of the humanities disciplines like philosophy, politics, economics, is making it so much harder to tackle this governance and societal problem. More or different tech is not a solution.
  - mrmonkeyman 6y ago
    Exactly. The system favors, even actively promotes, certain dynamics which lead to predictable results. I have faith in humanity though. They will eventually, slowly, converge on a new optimum. Probably under the stress of painful and certain extinction, but that's just a detail.

Reventlov 6y ago

Main problem is that while the DSA is still not voted, you don't really know what will be in the text, and the old texts still apply. So, for some time, French law could be in opposition with European law. Good thing Thierry Breton is the European Commissioner for Internal Market.

dang 6y ago

Submissions to HN need to be in English. We have deep respect for la belle langue and other languages, but HN is an English-language site. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=english%20language%20site%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...