Intermediary liability laws
around the world
recognize
that social media platforms, search engines, and other online service providers have become an integral part of our lives: they shape how we access information, communicate with others and participate in public debate, and foster innovation online. These laws generally shield platforms, to varying degrees, from legal liability for user content: the responsibility for unlawful speech should rest primarily with the speaker, not with those who merely host it.
These
liability protections are
not a gift
for platforms.
They exist so that platforms
are not encouraged to
proactively monitor and filter
what we say online, or to remove even lawful speech simply to avoid legal risk.
This is why a recent judgment by the EU Court of Justice,
Coyote System
(Joined Cases C-188/24 and C-190/24),
is concerning: it could deprive online platforms of liability protection because of how they organize and disseminate user content. The consequences for freedom of expression could be significant.
Liability Protections in the EU
The European Union has long embraced a system of limited liability for online service providers. Under the e-Commerce Directive and now the
Digital Services Act (DSA)
, platforms benefit from liability exemptions for user content. To discourage censorship, they also cannot be required to generally monitor user content or actively search for illegal activity. But that liability protection comes with
qualifications
: Platforms
lose this benefit if they play an "active role" such that they have
knowledge of, or control over, user-provided information
(Recital 42 ECD, Recital 18 DSA, and case law, for example para. 113 in
L’Oréal v eBay)
.
For hosting services, providers must remove or disable content they know to be illegal. The DSA has introduced extensive due diligence obligations for platforms but left these foundational immunities intact.
The message is clear: platforms
… [more]
