Job Posting: Legal Adviser on Freedom of Expression
The UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Irene Khan, is looking for a Legal Adviser to join her team. The key priority…
The UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Irene Khan, is looking for a Legal Adviser to join her team. The key priority…
Factsheet on Internet Shutdowns in International Law Prepared by Joan Barata, Senior Legal Fellow at Future of Free Speech Project, Justitia This Factsheet is meant…
This post originally appeared on the Strasbourg Observers blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks On 30 April 2019, in Kablis v. Russia, the European Court’s…
The Delhi High Court, in a petition filed by Flipkart seeking quashing of the first information report/FIR (information on the basis of which criminal proceedings are initiated), held that the ‘Safe Harbour Protection’ guaranteed to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is applicable to criminal cases as well. It further opined that it is not required for the intermediaries to take down content prohibited under the Indian Copyright Act or the Trademark Act only upon receipt of ‘actual knowledge’ pursuant to complaints received. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015 (5) SCC 1, the Court propounded that it is imperative for a court order pursuant to which intermediaries will comply with take down requests in relation to any complaint.
Published in Yale Journal on Regulation Bulletin 38 (86-111), 2020 Abstract: Private social media companies regulate much more speech than any government does, and their…
Published in International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, November 2023 Abstract In 2023, the Grand Chamber of the…
This report was originally published by the Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media and is republished here with permission and thanks. 7amleh –…