STF postpones judgment of actions on regulation of big techs – 05/17/2023 – Power

The STF (Supreme Federal Court) will leave for the second half of June the judgment of actions that deal with the accountability of social networks for content posted by users. The date has not yet been set by President Rosa Weber.

Proceedings about the possible suspension of social networks through a court decision and the overthrow of an article in the Civil Rights Framework for the Internet were scheduled to be judged this Wednesday (17).

The STF informed, however, that they will not be called by the president, at the request of the rapporteurs of the actions Dias Toffoli and Luiz Fux. The rescheduling, according to the court, was also made at the request of the ministers.

The court’s argument is that there would be no time to judge the actions on that date. This is because the court is still analyzing a criminal action by Lava Jato against former president Fernando Collor. The case began to be judged this Thursday (11), but Minister Edson Fachin, rapporteur for this case, has not yet finished reading his vote.

The continuation of this judgment will be made in this Wednesday’s session. Next, the votes of the other ministers on the case are expected. In the action, Collor is accused of receiving bribes in a corruption scheme at BR Distribuidora, a subsidiary of Petrobras.

Actions on the Marco Civil face resistance from big techs and annoyance from Congress. The judgment generates pressure for the Legislative Power to anticipate and prevent the Supreme Court from legislating through a judicial decision.

The process under Toffoli’s responsibility deals with the constitutionality of article 19 of the Marco Civil da Internet, sanctioned in 2014 by then-president Dilma Rousseff (PT).

This article states that a platform will only be civilly liable for content published by its users if it fails to comply with a court order to remove the content.

In the appeal that reached the Supreme Court and will serve as a concrete case for the judgment of Toffoli’s action, a woman asked Facebook to remove a fake profile that pretended to be her and offended several people. Facebook declined to act. She asked for the overthrow of the profile and compensation for moral damages.

The action reported by Fux is similar and deals with the duty of the host company to supervise the content that is published by its users and to remove it from the air when considered offensive, without intervention of the Judiciary.

In this case, a teacher asked Orkut (which was bought by Google) to take down a community that had criticized and insulted her. She was not answered, and asks Google, in addition to removal, compensation for moral damages.

In private conversations, members of the court already discussed that, if the National Congress did not approve bill 2630, known as the Fake News PL, the Supreme Court would rule on the matter.

The majority understanding in the STF is that it is necessary to improve the legal device that exempts platforms from responsibility and requires tougher content moderation.

Today, the Civil Rights Framework establishes that only in cases of images of non-consensual nudity (revenge porn) can companies be held responsible even before a court decision, simply by notifying the user.

Party leaders in the Chamber closed an agreement to vote this Wednesday on the urgency requirement of the project that deals with the payment of copyrights to artists. In practice, this will mean slicing the Fake News PL.

The parliamentarians still articulate the inclusion, in the copyright text, of devices on remuneration to journalism companies, which displeases the government supporters.

Planalto Palace allies fear that the division of PL 2630, reported by Deputy Orlando Silva (PC do B-SP), will take strength from the original project and that the regulation of big techs will not advance this semester.