Judgment on big techs should be in the second half – 03/06/2023 – Panel

Judgment on big techs should be in the second half – 03/06/2023 – Panel

[ad_1]

Although it has been rescheduled for June, the judgment on the accountability of large technology companies in the STF (Supreme Federal Court) should only take place in the second half of this year, after the recess of the Judiciary, evaluate ministers.

The reason is the already extensive agenda and with delicate subjects for the next month. The plenary should address, for example, the timeframe for demarcating indigenous lands, a topic also under analysis in the National Congress.

The proceedings on the Marco Civil da Internet were ruled after the rapporteur of one of them, Minister Dias Toffoli, released it for judgment.

The action took place at a time when Congress was trying to postpone the vote on the Fake News PL and was read as a way of putting pressure on parliamentarians to anticipate and regulate the matter. Due to lack of agreement, the project was removed from the agenda even so, at the request of the rapporteur, Orlando Silva (PCdoB-SP).

Even though it has cooled down in the Chamber, the matter will soon be faced by the STF, say the magistrates, before the end of Minister Rosa Weber’s presidency, in October.

They deal with specific cases and will need to be analyzed even if the Fake News PL is voted on. What is being reported by Minister Luiz Fux, for example, concerns a publication made on Orkut, a social network that has been out of use for some years.

Toffoli has been talking with colleagues to reach the vote with a minimum consensus on some points. Several ministers have already spoken publicly about the need to regulate big techs, such as Gilmar Mendes and Luís Roberto Barroso.

There are technical issues in the matter. The lawsuit reported by Toffoli judges article 19 of the Marco Civil, which determines that the “internet application provider” can only be civilly liable for content generated by third parties if it does not comply with a court order.

One of the points to be debated is the scope of the term “provider” — whether it should be applied to e-mails, with individual message exchanges, for example.


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

[ad_2]

Source link