The Rise of Digital Authoritarianism In Egypt: Digital Expression Arrests From 2011-2019
This report was published by the Open Technology Fund and is republished here with permission and thanks. Since 2013, Egypt has seen the worst human…
Cox. v. Twitter
The main issue for the Court to analyze in this case was if Twitter’s decision to suspend Mr. Cox was protected under 230(c)(2)(A) of the…
The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University’s Third Party Intervention in “Conchita Wurst case”
Following is a re-post of a blog published by the Strasbourg Observers The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University[1] has recently submitted a third party intervention in the…
A.B. v. Bragg Communications
C
The Court’s Subtle Approach of Online Media Platforms’ Liability for User-Generated Content Since the ‘Delfi Oracle’
This post was originally published by Strasbourg Observers and Inforrm and is reproduced with permission and thanks. Introduction On 18 June 2015, Strasbourg Observers published…
Bible Believers v. Wayne County
The en banc review of the Sixth Circuit reversed its previous judgment and determined that the Bible Believers’ speech was protected by the First Amendment even if it could be considered offensive and loathsome. The court also concluded that the Wayne County officials effectuated a heckler’s veto which violated the First Amendment. Wayne County did not prove a legitimate interest in order to limit the right to freedom of expression of the Bible Believers.
Nicolás Massai del Real v. Undersecretary of Public Health
Ch., The Council for Transparency, decisions ROL C518-09
Palamara Iribarne v. Chile
Americans only figured out free speech 50 years ago. Here’s how the world can follow our lead.
Read Columbia University President Lee C. Bollinger’s op-ed article published by The Washington Post February 12th, 2015.