Message 002
Communication from the Commission - TRIS/(2021) 01855
Directive (EU) 2015/1535
Translation of the message 001
Notification: 2021/0304/F
No abre el plazo - Nezahajuje odklady - Fristerne indledes ikke - Kein Fristbeginn - Viivituste perioodi ei avata - Καμμία έναρξη προθεσμίας - Does not open the delays - N'ouvre pas de délais - Non fa decorrere la mora - Neietekmē atlikšanu - Atidėjimai nepradedami - Nem nyitja meg a késéseket - Ma’ jiftaħx il-perijodi ta’ dawmien - Geen termijnbegin - Nie otwiera opóźnień - Não inicia o prazo - Neotvorí oneskorenia - Ne uvaja zamud - Määräaika ei ala tästä - Inleder ingen frist - Не се предвижда период на прекъсване - Nu deschide perioadele de stagnare - Nu deschide perioadele de stagnare.
(MSG: 202101855.EN)
1. MSG 002 IND 2021 0304 F EN 21-05-2021 F NOTIF
2. F
3A. Ministères économiques et financiers
Direction générale des entreprises
SQUALPI
Bât. Sieyès -Teledoc 151
61, Bd Vincent Auriol
75703 PARIS Cedex 13
d9834.france@finances.gouv.fr
3B. Direction générale des entreprises
Service de l’économie numérique
Ministère de l’économie, des finances et de la relance
139 rue de Bercy
75012 Paris
4. 2021/0304/F - SERV
5. Draft law reinforcing compliance with the principles of the Republic
6. Online platforms (namely social networks and search engines)
7. -
8. By notification 2021/152/F of 12 March 2021, the French authorities notified Articles 19 and 19a of the Draft law reinforcing compliance with the principles of the Republic.
With regard to the subject-matter of the above-mentioned notification, amendments were made to paragraphs 2, 5 and 8 of Article 19 during consideration by the Senate last April. The French authorities are therefore submitting a new notification in accordance with § 3 of Article 5(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/1535.
Articles 19 and 19a form part of Chapter IV of the bill dedicated to combatting hate speech and illegal online content. Article 19 establishes a mechanism for combatting “mirror sites” of sites already considered illegal, based on the intervention of the competent administrative authority. Said authority may request the blocking of access or the de-listing of an online public communication service in which the content is identical or equivalent to that of the service covered by the court ruling. Article 19a establishes for certain operators of online platforms (social networks, search engines, etc.), whose audience exceeds a certain threshold, a series of obligations of means intended to prevent and combat the online dissemination of illegal content that is detrimental to human dignity. These obligations apply to operators, whether or not they are established on French territory. The principle obligations established in Article 19a relate to (i) cooperation with judicial or administrative authorities, the retention of reported and withdrawn content, and the appointment of a point of contact; (ii) the transparency of the general conditions of use, the moderation system, the conditions for the suspension or termination of the account and the public reporting on their moderation policy; (iii) providing users with a mechanism for reporting illegal content and processing said reports promptly; (iv) the establishment of internal processes to combat the withdrawal of content and suspension of accounts; (v) the evaluation and mitigation of systemic risks associated with the service; (vi) an obligation to report periodically to the Conseil Supérieur de l’Audiovisuel (Higher Audio-visual Council) and (vii) possible formal notices and sanctions imposed by the same Conseil Supérieur de l’Audiovisuel in the event of non-compliance with these obligations.
The amendments to paragraphs 2, 5 and 8 of Article 19 relate to the following four points:
Paragraph 2: the purpose of the amendment is to broaden the scope of the actors to whom the judicial authorities may prescribe any measures designed to prevent or stop damage caused by an illegal site or illegal content; the injunction of the judge is no longer limited to hosts or internet service providers, but to “any person” who may contribute to these preventive measures. It replaces the interim measure and request procedures of Article 6 I 8 of the Law on Confidence in the Digital Economy by the accelerated procedure on the merits provided for by Article 481-1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Paragraph 5: two changes were made:
- on the one hand, the amendment seeks also to extend the scope of the actors from whom the administrative authority may demand the blocking of a “mirror” site; in accordance with paragraph 2, the administrative authority’s demand is no longer limited to hosts or internet service providers, but may be addressed to “any person” who may contribute to preventing access to this mirror site;
- the definition of a “mirror-site” is revised in more circumscript and narrower terms; the “mirror-site” is the online website which reproduces “in whole or substantially” the content of the online service targeted by the judge’s decision.
Paragraph 8: in accordance with paragraph 2, the amendment replaces the interim measure and request procedures in the event of non-compliance with the blocking or de-listing demand by the accelerated procedure on the merits provided for by Article 481-1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
9. The French authorities have been confronted with a series of attacks, the most recent of which (the Conflans-Sainte-Honorine attack) once again illustrated the major role played by the online dissemination, on certain major platforms, of content that incites violence and hatred. They consider that there is an urgent need to take action to make these operators responsible for the position they now occupy in the public sphere, taking into account the systemic risks that their operating models may entail. The logic of Article 19a is based on a system of obligations of means, which corresponds to that adopted by the draft European regulation “Digital Services Act”. The law is intended to be applied pending the entry into force of this European initiative and, in any event, no later than 31 December 2023.
As regards the amendments to paragraphs 2, 5 and 8 of Article 19, these are justified in particular for the following reasons:
- Technological developments tend to broaden the scope of actors that can be usefully requested to stop online illegalities, beyond hosts and internet service providers. For example, in order to prevent access to a site, the emergence of the new protocol “DNS over HTTPS” (“DoH”) could involve actors such as DoH server operators. The new definition of a “mirror-site” is more relevant to understanding the notion of an online website (and not isolated content). It takes into account the fact that minor changes can be made very easily and very quickly to the content of a site deemed illegal, which should not prevent the application of blocking or de-listing measures. This definition provides an additional guarantee in terms of the mechanism’s proportionality and effectiveness. It is specified in this regard that the intervention of the public authority which identifies the mirror sites and transmits this information to the intermediaries concerned by the mechanism is a guarantee of legal certainty.
- The new accelerated procedure on the merits has the advantage, compared to those previously provided for, of being adversarial in nature, thereby providing greater guarantees of the rights of the defence. This procedure is subject to appeal, unless the decision is handed down by the first president of the Court of Appeal. The blocking decisions shall be definitive, allowing a more appropriate response to the parties by guaranteeing their legal certainty.
10. No reference material is available
11. No
12. -
13. No
14. No
15. -
16. TBT aspect
No - the draft is not a technical regulation or a conformity assessment procedure
SPS aspect
No - the draft is not a sanitary or phytosanitary measure.
**********
European Commission
Contact point Directive (EU) 2015/1535
Fax: +32 229 98043
email: grow-dir2015-1535-central@ec.europa.eu
