Continuous technological progress, together with the existence of an increasingly globalised and connected world, must be accompanied by normative regulation that establishes the limits of what is permitted and what is an infringement of rights and freedoms, as well as institutions or bodies that control and defend compliance with these limitations.
To date, there has been no expert body specifically created to resolve disputes arising within the Internet sphere.. In this sense, it was Facebook Inc. by its founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, the company that created what can be considered the first "Tribunal" in charge of deciding exclusively on issues relating to infringements of rights within the digital sphere (specifically, in Facebook's social networks: Facebook itself and Instagram, for the time being), and which has been called the Content Advisory Board.
Notwithstanding the above, why has the founder of Facebook created this Content Advisory Board to control the content posted on its social networks by users, and does Facebook Inc., as the company that owns the Facebook or Instagram social networks, have the obligation or responsibility to control and supervise this content?
In this regard, it should be noted that one of the main questions that the owner of a website raises, in relation to his duty of care and management of the siteis that relating to the responsibility that it may have with respect to the content generated by users (comments, opinions, statements of any kind, etc.), and which is hosted therein.
In this regard, and with regard to the current legislation on this matter in Spain, Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on electronic commerce should be taken into account, which establishes that "(...) the service provider cannot be held responsible for data stored at the request of the recipient".
However, and taking into account the above, this provision also includes two conditions for the service provider or owner of a website to be exempted from any liability for the content of its contents site: (i) who does not have actual knowledge that the activity generated by users is unlawful, and that (ii) as soon as it becomes aware of the existence and unlawfulness of the facts, the owner of the website shall act diligently and promptly to remove any data or information whose publication may constitute a criminal offence, or, where appropriate, to make access to such information impossible.
Similarly, Article 15 of the same law states, in its first section, that "Member States shall not impose on service providers a general obligation to monitor data that are transmitted or stored, nor a general obligation to carry out active searches for facts or circumstances indicating illegal activities (...)", website owners must only communicate ".promptly to the competent public authorities of suspected unlawful data or unlawful activities carried out by recipients of its service or the obligation to communicate to the competent authorities, at their request, information enabling them to identify the recipients of its service (...)".
Notwithstanding the foregoing, and despite the existence of a regulatory exemption for web service providers from the responsibility to control and supervise the contents of their sitesMark Zuckerberg, in an attempt to shed some of this duty of care with regard to the content hosted on his social networks in all cases considered "highly relevant or representative" in terms of freedom of expression, has created this Content Advisory Board, thus passing the baton of responsibility and final say in such cases to this independent body.
In Mark Zucherberg's own words, in November 2018, "Facebook should not be making so many important decisions about freedom of expression and security on its own".
In terms of legal implications, it was time for there to be a unified, independent and expert body to which users could turn if their rights were undermined, as well as for progress to begin to be made towards a regulation that recognises and establishes certain normative limits in this digital sphere where there are still many legal loopholes..
To date, there have been resolutions without evident, debatable and unilateral results on the part of the companies that own the web platforms and social networks, which could even have important implications for the defence of the honour of individuals (such as, for example, systematic impunity for the commission of acts that could constitute a crime, such as defamation, harassment, libel, slander or threats), and for freedom of expression (such as, for example, the removal of political or religious manifestations, censorship on certain controversial topics, etc.).).
From now on, the Content Advisory Board will decide exclusively on "highly representative" freedom of expression issues, and which by their nature and social relevance require greater knowledge and experience, and the decisions taken by this body will be, like those of a judge in ordinary proceedings, binding, and Facebook must abide by them and carry them out at all times, except in cases that involve the infringement of the law.
Conclusions
In view of the above, and although the task of this body is for the time being only to review a percentage of "highly representative" cases (i.e. it will not assess or decide on the totality of cases), This represents an important step forward in the protection of freedom of expression on the Internet, as well as in the defence of very personal rights such as those relating to the honour of individuals.This is because the final decisions taken by the Content Advisory Board in each case, in its role as an independent body, will clearly establish precedents that can help clarify Facebook's decision-making (and even that of other social network owners) for other cases considered less relevant, and which the company will continue to decide on unilaterally.
José María Baños Pita
Founding partner of LetsLawa law firm specialising in Digital and Commercial Law