Big techs choose war and will have civil liability – 04/05/2023 – Reinaldo Azevedo

With the undated postponement of the Fake News PL vote, the so-called “big techs” went to war; they actively collaborated to subject the respective summits of the three Powers —whose headquarters were spectacularly vandalized on January 8— to temporary humiliation; gave a public demonstration of muscle, showing that they have instruments to make even the most appalling distortions influential, and established or renewed an objective alliance with right-wing extremists, even sharing exceptional vocabulary to disparage the very moderate text of deputy Orlando Silva (PC do B -SP). Some and others accused the creation of a supposed “Ministry of Truth” —improper appropriation because George Orwell’s “1984” was poorly read— and the so-called “vigilantism”, with its unfailing inflection of supposedly progressive criticism. It was a Pyrrhic victory, as I will show.

I can’t resist, before it follows, a joke. “Vigilantism”? Wow! In less harsh days, many moral and ethical centuries ago, someone would pull their armpits, back in the day when showing off books yielded flirtations of intellectual complicity, with some hope of exchanging moods, a Michel Foucault. And one could say: “Oh, the passion of these people to watch and punish”. But that train has already passed. It’s from the time when “joke” was used. Even some groups that identify themselves as “progressive” —and I’m not disputing the self-declaration— began to vocalize the Internet giants’ version. They would necessarily lose out, assured the ball’s owners, due to the remuneration of journalistic companies, also provided for in PL 2630.

I have already made this observation everywhere: for my taste, things would not mix. The necessary regulation of platforms, networks and “messaging” services —this is a neologism that is not even in the Orthographic Vocabulary of the Portuguese Language— is something different from such remuneration. They should be in different PLs. Although a minor issue for the giants, it helped them to gain allies, in my view unwary, on the left. Each one chooses his path.

The truth is that the “core” issue —in days of “vigilantism”—is another. The rub is in the civil liability of the platforms that house the production of third parties. Without such a legal imposition, they are released, except for their own and unclear criteria, from the so-called “duty of care”, following their routine, including billing, regardless of whether it’s Gandhi or any other fascinator generate engagement.

It is still emblematically contradictory that they claim to exclude content only according to their protocols, but launch themselves in a crusade against a legislative proposal. The message: “We lead, we are not led; we refuse to let the government tell us what to do; but we will tell you what we don’t allow you to do.”

Ask yourself: “But can’t these potentates say what they think?” Clear! The indications, however, that guide the debate —and the link published by Google on its search homepage is just the most eloquent manifestation— challenge the public nature of the service they provide. Back to the point: the “big techs” could have won the game, even losing the vote, because they would help define, through other laws, the application of the fundamentals of the PL. But not. They are now investigated in surveys 4781 (of fake news) and 4874 (of digital militias), whose rapporteur is Alexandre de Moraes.

Civil liability will either be decided by the Legislature or will be disciplined by the STF, in full exercise of its prerogatives. It is a constitutional mandate, as any jurist knows. Article 19 of the Civil Rights Framework (2014), which guarantees civil unimputability to an “internet application provider”, unless it violates a court decision, is patently unconstitutional. Those were somewhat innocent times, and things stayed there, while algorithms fed the monetized Leviathan of chaos. The device is just not as old, in terms of era, as Foucault under his arm and the joke.

Between negotiated civil accountability and war, would-be power holders chose war. And they will have civil liability.

PRESENT LINK: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release five free hits of any link per day. Just click the blue F below.