Cover des Buchs: Updating the Rules for Online Content Dissemination
Monographie Open Access Vollzugriff

Updating the Rules for Online Content Dissemination

Legislative Options of the European Union and the Digital Services Act Proposal
Autor:innen:
Verlag:
 2021

Zusammenfassung

Der aktuelle Rechtsrahmen für die Verbreitung von Online-Inhalten hat sich als unzureichend für die effektive Bekämpfung von illegalen Inhalten erwiesen. Mit dem Kommissions-Vorschlag für einen „Digital Services Act“ soll der horizontale Rahmen für Intermediäre aktualisiert und ein sicheres Online-Umfeld geschaffen werden. Soweit es aber um Inhaltevermittlung geht, folgt aus europäischen Grundwerten und -rechten die Berücksichtigung medialer Besonderheiten.

Die vom Institut für Europäisches Medienrecht (EMR) im Auftrag der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW erstellte Studie beschreibt den geltenden Rechtsrahmen und vorgelegten Vorschlag und gibt eine umfassende Bewertung aus Perspektive des Medienrechts ergänzt durch Alternativvorschläge zur weiteren Verbesserung.

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr
2021
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-8184-3
ISBN-Online
978-3-7489-2593-4
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe
Schriftenreihe Medienforschung der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW
Band
83
Sprache
Englisch
Seiten
241
Produkttyp
Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 - 16 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  2. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. Background of the Study
    2. Aim of the Study
    3. Current Regulatory Framework of the European Union and Members States
    4. Regulatory Options on EU level
    5. Clarification of the Country of Origin Principle as Basis and its Exceptions
    6. Defining the Scope of Application of the Framework
    7. Reforming the Liability Privilege Regime
    8. Introducing Obligations and Duties for Service Providers
    9. Institutional Setup for Monitoring of Compliance and Enforcement
    10. Evaluation of the approaches chosen in the DSA Proposal
    11. Conclusions
  3. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. Hintergrund der Studie
    2. Ziel der Studie
    3. Aktueller Rechtsrahmen innerhalb der EU und ihrer Mitgliedstaaten
    4. Regelungsoptionen auf EU-Ebene
    5. Klarstellung des Herkunftslandprinzips als Basis und dessen Ausnahmen
    6. Die Definition des Anwendungsbereichs des Rechtsrahmens
    7. Die Reform des Regimes zur Haftungsprivilegierung
    8. Die Einführung von Pflichten und Obliegenheiten für Diensteanbieter
    9. Die institutionelle Ausgestaltung der Überwachung und der Rechtsdurchsetzung
    10. Bewertung der im DSA vorgeschlagenen Ansätze
    11. Schlussfolgerungen
  4. A. Background of the Study 75 - 80 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  5. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. I. On Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Freedoms and EU Values
    2. II. On the Allocation of Competences
    3. III. The Network of Sectoral Regulation
  6. C. Problems Identified regarding the Cross-Border Dissemination of Online Content 101 - 106 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  7. Download Kapitel (PDF)
    1. I. On the Digital Services Act Proposal
    2. II. On the Digital Markets Act Proposal
  8. Download Kapitel (PDF)
        1. a. Legal Instrument
        2. b. Content Neutrality of Horizontal Approaches
        3. c. Material Scope, Sectoral Exceptions and Discretion
        4. d. Defining Objectives of a Regulatory Approach
      2. 2. DSA Approach
      3. 3. Assessment
        1. a. Key Issues for Assessment
        2. b. Options: COO Principle or Market Location Principle
        3. c. Key Points for Design
      2. 2. DSA Approach
      3. 3. Assessment
      1. 1. Starting point
      2. 2. DSA Approach
      3. 3. Assessment
      1. 1. Starting Point
      2. 2. DSA Approach
      3. 3. Assessment
        1. a. Reactive Obligations: Notice and Takedown and Dispute Settlement
        2. b. Reactive Obligations: Trusted Flaggers and Law Enforcement Cooperation
        3. c. Proactive Obligations: User Empowerment
        4. d. Proactive Obligations: Stay down, Know Your Customer and Sanctions
        5. e. Proactive Obligations: Content Management
        6. f. Transparency, Reporting and Information Obligations
        1. a. All Intermediary Service Providers (Art. 10–13)
        2. b. Hosting Service Providers (Art. 14–15)
        3. c. Online Platforms (Art. 16–24)
        4. d. Very Large Online Platforms (Art. 25–33)
        5. e. Additional Obligations (Art. 34–37)
      3. 3. Assessment
        1. a. Overall Structure of Supervision
        2. b. Regulatory Powers and Sanctions
        3. c. Supranational Coordination and Cooperation
        1. a. Overall Structure of Supervision
        2. b. Regulatory Powers and Sanctions
        3. c. Supranational Coordination and Cooperation
      3. 3. Assessment
  9. F. Looking Ahead 229 - 232 Download Kapitel (PDF)
  10. Bibliography 233 - 241 Download Kapitel (PDF)

Literaturverzeichnis (162)

  1. Albath, L.; Giesel M.: Das Herkunftslandprinzip in der Dienstleistungsrichtlinie – Eine Kodifizierung der Rechtsprechung? In: EuZW 9 (2), 2006, p. 38–42. Google Scholar öffnen
  2. Cited: Albath/Giesel, in: EuZW 9(2), 2006, 38, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  3. Babbs, D.: New Year, New Internet? Why It’s Time to Rethink Anonymity on Social Media, in: Inforrm’s Blog, 2020, https://inforrm.org/2020/01/31/new-year-new-internet-why-its-time-to-rethink-anonymity-on-social-media-david-babbs/. Google Scholar öffnen
  4. Cited: Babbs, in: Inforrm’s Blog, New Year, New Internet? Why It’s Time to Rethink Anonymity on Social Media. Google Scholar öffnen
  5. Blandin, L.: Proceedings of the Workshop on “E-commerce rules, fit for the digital age”, Study for the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Brussels, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  6. Cited: speaker, in: Blandin, Proceedings of the Workshop on “E-commerce rules, fit for the digital age”. Google Scholar öffnen
  7. Blanke, H.-J.; Mangiameli, S. (eds.): The Treaty on European Union (TEU), Berlin 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
  8. Cited: author, in: Blanke/Mangiameli. Google Scholar öffnen
  9. Büllesbach, A.; Gijrath, S. J. H.; Poullet, Y.; Prins, J. E. J. (eds.): Concise European IT Law, 2nd edition, Alphen aan den Rijn 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  10. Cited: Büllesbach et al. (eds.), Concise European IT Law. Google Scholar öffnen
  11. Cappello, M. (ed.): Media pluralism and competition issues, IRIS Special, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2020, https://rm.coe.int/iris-special-1-2020en-media-pluralism-and-competition-issues/1680a08455. Google Scholar öffnen
  12. Cited: author, in: Cappello (ed.), Media pluralism and competition issues. Google Scholar öffnen
  13. Chapuis-Doppler, A.; Delhomme, V.: Regulating Composite Platform Economy Services: The State-of-play After Airbnb Ireland, in: European Papers, 5 (1), 2020, p. 411–428. Google Scholar öffnen
  14. Cited: Chapuis-Doppler/Delhomme, in: European Papers, 5 (1), 2020, 411, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  15. Cobbe, J.; Singh, J.: Regulating Recommending: Motivations, Considerations, and Principles, in: European Journal of Law and Technology (EJLT), 10 (3), 2019, https://ejlt.org/index.php/ejlt/article/view/686. Google Scholar öffnen
  16. Cited: Cobbe/Singh, in: EJLT, 10 (3), 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  17. Cohen, J.E.: The Regulatory State in the Information Age, in: Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 17 (1), 2016 p. 369-411. Google Scholar öffnen
  18. Cited: Cohen, in: Theoretical Inquiries in Law 17 (1), 2016, 369, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  19. Cole, M.: Gestaltungsspielraum der EU-Mitgliedstaaten bei Einschränkungen der Dienstleistungsfreiheit, in: Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kommunikationsrecht (AfP), 52 (1), 2021, p. 1–7. Google Scholar öffnen
  20. Cited: Cole, in: AfP 52 (1), 2021, 1, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  21. Cole, M.: Zum Gestaltungsspielraum der EU-Mitgliedstaaten bei Einschränkungen der Dienstleistungsfreiheit. Eine Untersuchung am Beispiel einer Regelung bezüglich der Medienvielfalt in Deutschland, Saarbruecken 2020, https://emr-sb.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Zum-Gestaltungsspielraum-der-EU-Mitgliedstaaten-bei-Einschr%c3%a4nkungen-der-Dienstleistungsfreiheit.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  22. Cited: Cole, Zum Gestaltungsspielraum der EU-Mitgliedstaaten bei Einschränkungen der Dienstleistungsfreiheit. Google Scholar öffnen
  23. Cole, M.: Die Neuregelung des Artikel 7b Richtlinie 2010/13/EU (AVMD-RL), Saarbruecken, 2019, https://emr-sb.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/emr-gutachten_neuregelung-des-artikel-7b-avmd_11.2019.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  24. Cited: Cole, Die Neuregelung des Artikel 7b Richtlinie 2010/13/EU (AVMD-RL). Google Scholar öffnen
  25. Cole, M.: The AVMSD Jurisdiction Criteria concerning Audiovisual Media Service Providers after the 2018 Reform, Saarbruecken, 2018, https://emr-sb.de/study-avmsd-jurisdiction-criteria/. Google Scholar öffnen
  26. Cited: Cole, AVMSD Jurisdiction Criteria after the 2018 Reform. Google Scholar öffnen
  27. Cole, M.: The Country of Origin Principle – From State Sovereignty under Public International Law to Inclusion in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive of the European Union, in: Meng, W.; Ress, G.; Stein, T. (eds.), Europäische Integration und Globalisierung – Festschrift zum 60-jährigen Bestehen des Europa-Instituts, Baden-Baden 2011. Google Scholar öffnen
  28. Cited: Cole, The Country of Origin Principle. Google Scholar öffnen
  29. Cole, M.: Europarechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für die Pluralismussicherung im Rundfunk, in: Freiheitssicherung durch Regulierung: fördert oder gefährdet die Wettbewerbsaufsicht publizistische Vielfalt im Rundfunk?, Baden-Baden 2009, p. 93 - 130. Google Scholar öffnen
  30. Cited: Cole, Europarechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für die Pluralismussicherung im Rundfunk, 93, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  31. Cole, M.; Etteldorf, C.; Ullrich, C.: Cross-border Dissemination of Online Content: Current and Possible Future Regulation of the Online Environment with a Focus on the EU E-Commerce Directive (Schriftenreihe Medienforschung der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW 81), Baden-Baden 2020, https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/9783748906438/cross-border-dissemination-of-online-content. Google Scholar öffnen
  32. Cited: Cole/Etteldorf/Ullrich, Cross-border Dissemination of Online Content. Google Scholar öffnen
  33. Cole, M.; Iacino, D.; Matzneller, P.; Metzdorf, J; Schweda S.: AVMS-RADAR: AudioVisual Media Services – Regulatory Authorities’ Independence and Efficiency Review: Update on recent changes and developments in Member States and Candidate Countries that are relevant for the analysis of independence and efficient functioning of audiovisual media services regulatory bodies (SMART 2013/0083), Study prepared for the Commission DG CNECT by the EMR and the University of Luxembourg, Brussels 2015, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9860f65c-8776-11e5-b8b7-01aa75ed71a1/language-en. Google Scholar öffnen
  34. Cited: Cole et al., AVMS-RADAR. Google Scholar öffnen
  35. Cole, M.; Ukrow, J.; Etteldorf, C.: On the Allocation of Competences between the European Union and its Member States in the Media Sector. An Analysis with particular Consideration of Measures concerning Media Pluralism, Saarbruecken 2020, https://www.rlp.de/de/regierung/staatskanzlei/medienpolitik/rundfunkkommission/aktuelle-studien-gutachten/. Google Scholar öffnen
  36. Cited: Cole/Ukrow/Etteldorf, On the Allocation of Competences between the European Union and its Member States in the Media Sector. Google Scholar öffnen
  37. Constantin, S.: Rethinking Subsidiarity and the Balance of Powers in the EU in Light of the Lisbon Treaty and Beyond, in: Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy (CYELP), 4, 2008, p. 151–177. Google Scholar öffnen
  38. Cited: Constantin in: CYELP 4, 2008, 151, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  39. Cornils, M.: Designing Platform Governance: A Normative Perspective on Needs, Strategies, and Tools to Regulate Intermediaries, Algorithm Watch, Berlin 2020, https://algorithmwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Governing-Platforms-legal-study-Cornils-May-2020-AlgorithmWatch.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  40. Cited: Cornils, Designing Platform Governance: A Normative Perspective on Needs, Strategies, and Tools to Regulate Intermediaries. Google Scholar öffnen
  41. de Posson, V.: Digital Services Act: Ensuring a Trustworthy and Safe Online Environment While Allowing Freedom of Expression, in: Disruptive Competition Project, 20th January 2021, https://www.project-disco.org/european-union/012021-dsa-ensuring-a-trustworthy-and-safe-online-enviornment-while-allowing-freedom-of-expression/. Google Scholar öffnen
  42. Cited: de Posson, Digital Services Act: Ensuring a Trustworthy and Safe Online Environment While Allowing Freedom of Expression. Google Scholar öffnen
  43. de Streel, A.; Broughton Micova, S.: Digital Services Act: Deepening the internal market and clarifying responsibilities for digital services, Brussels 2020, https://cerre.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/CERRE_DSA_Deepening-the-internal-market-and-clarifying-responsibilities-for-digital-services_Full-report_December2020.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  44. Cited: de Streel/Broughton Micova, Digital Services Act: Deepening the internal market and clarifying responsibilities for digital services. Google Scholar öffnen
  45. de Streel, A.; Husovec, M.: The e-commerce Directive as the cornerstone of the Internal Market. Assessment and options for reform, Luxembourg, 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648797/IPOL_STU(2020)648797_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  46. Cited: de Streel/Husovec, The e-commerce Directive as the cornerstone of the Internal Market. Google Scholar öffnen
  47. de Streel, A.; Defreyne, E.; Jacquemin, H.; Ledger, M.; Innesti, A.; Goubet, M.; Ustowski, D.: Online Platforms’ Moderation of Illegal Content Online, Study for the committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/652718/IPOL_STU(2020)652718_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  48. Cited: de Streel et al., Online Platforms’ Moderation of Illegal Content Online. Google Scholar öffnen
  49. Diaz Crego, M.; Manko, R.; van Ballegooij, W.: Protecting EU common values within the Member States. An overview of monitoring, prevention and enforcement mechanisms at EU level, EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service, Brussels, 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/652088/EPRS_STU(2020)652088_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  50. Cited: Diaz Crego/Manko/van Ballegooij (EPRS study), Protecting EU common values within the Member States. Google Scholar öffnen
  51. Dreyer, S.; Heyer, R.; Seipp, T. J.; Schulz W.: The European Communication (Dis)Order. Mapping the media-relevant European legislative acts and identification of dependencies, interface areas and conflicts. Hamburg 2020 (Working Papers of the HBI No. 52), https://hans-bredow-institut.de/uploads/media/default/cms/media/8engbt7_AP52BKM_Mapping-Gutachten_en.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  52. Cited: Dreyer et al., The European Communication (Dis)Order. Google Scholar öffnen
  53. European Parliament: The Future of Money, Study for the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2019, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/642364/IPOL_STU(2019)642364_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  54. Cited: author, in: European Parliament, The Future of Money. Google Scholar öffnen
  55. European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media (ERGA): Report on the independence of NRAs, 15 December 2015, available at http://erga-online.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/report_indep_nra_2015.pdf.. Google Scholar öffnen
  56. Cited: ERGA, Report on the independence of NRAs. Google Scholar öffnen
  57. Evas, T.: Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence. European added value assessment, Study of the European Parliamentary Research Service, Brussels, 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/654178/EPRS_STU(2020)654178_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  58. Cited: Evas (EPRS study), Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence. Google Scholar öffnen
  59. Geiger, C.; Jütte, B.J.: Platform liability under Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive – Automated Filtering and Fundamental Rights: An Impossible Match, forthcoming in: GRUR International 2021, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3776267. Google Scholar öffnen
  60. Cited: Geiger/Jütte, Platform liability under Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive. Google Scholar öffnen
  61. Grabitz, E.; Hilf, M.; Nettesheim, M. (eds.): Das Recht der Europäischen Union: EUV/AEUV, Vol. 71, Munich, 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  62. Cited: author, in: Grabitz/Hilf/Nettesheim. Google Scholar öffnen
  63. Haarkötter, H.: Journalismus.online: Das Handbuch zum Online-Journalismus, Cologne 2019. Google Scholar öffnen
  64. Cited: Haarkötter, Journalismus.online: Das Handbuch zum Online-Journalismus. Google Scholar öffnen
  65. Hadzhieva, E., Impact of Digitalisation on International Tax Matters, Study for the Committee on Financial Crimes, Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2019, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/626078/IPOL_STU(2019)626078_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  66. Cited: Hadzhieva, Impact of Digitalisation on International Tax Matters. Google Scholar öffnen
  67. Harrison J.; Woods, L.: Jurisdiction, forum shopping and the ‘race to the bottom’, Cambridge 2007. Google Scholar öffnen
  68. Cited: Harrison/Woods, Jurisdiction, forum shopping and the ‘race to the bottom’. Google Scholar öffnen
  69. Helberger, N.; Pierson, J.; Poell, T.: Governing Online Platforms: From Contested to Cooperative Responsibility, in: The Information Society, 34, 2018, p. 1–2. Google Scholar öffnen
  70. Cited: Helberger/Pierson/Poell in: The Information Society, 34, 2018, 1, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  71. Hörnle, J.: Country of Origin Regulation in Cross-Border Media: One Step Beyond the Freedom to Provide Services?, in: International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 54 (1), 2005, p. 89–126. Google Scholar öffnen
  72. Cited: Hörnle, in: International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 54 (1), 2005, 89, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  73. Iacob, N.; Simonelli, F.: How to Fully Reap the Benefits of the Internal Market for E-Commerce?, Study for the committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648801/IPOL_STU(2020)648801_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  74. Cited: Iacob/Simonelli, How to Fully Reap the Benefits of the Internal Market for E-Commerce? Google Scholar öffnen
  75. Joint Research Centre (European Commission): Multimedia information society, Brussels 1997, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/4da834e3-011d-11ea-8c1f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-140486803. Google Scholar öffnen
  76. Cited: Joint Research Centre, Multimedia information society. Google Scholar öffnen
  77. Jungheim, S.: Medienordnung und Wettbewerbsrecht im Zeitalter der Digitalisierung und Globalisierung, Tuebingen 2012. Google Scholar öffnen
  78. Cited: Jungheim, Medienordnung und Wettbewerbsrecht im Zeitalter der Digitalisierung und Globalisierung. Google Scholar öffnen
  79. Koltay, A. (ed.): Media Freedom and Regulation in the New Media World, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  80. Cited: author, in: Koltay, Media Freedom and Regulation in the New Media World. Google Scholar öffnen
  81. Kuczerawy, A.: Intermediary Liability and Freedom of Expression in the EU: from Concepts to Safeguards, Cambridge 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  82. Cited: Kuczerawy, Intermediary Liability and Freedom of Expression in the EU: from Concepts to Safeguards. Google Scholar öffnen
  83. Lavi, M.: Evil Nudges, in: Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law (JETLaw), 21 (1), 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  84. Cited: Lavi, in: JETLaw, 21 (1), 2018. Google Scholar öffnen
  85. Lievens, E.: Protecting Children in the Digital Era: The Use of Alternative Regulatory Instruments, Leiden/Boston 2010. Google Scholar öffnen
  86. Cited: Lievens, Protecting Children in the Digital Era: The Use of Alternative Regulatory Instruments. Google Scholar öffnen
  87. Lomba, N.; Evas, T.: Digital services act. European added value assessment, Study of the European Parliamentary Research Services, Brussels 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/654180/EPRS_STU(2020)654180_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  88. Cited: Lomba/Evas (EPRS study), Digital services act. Google Scholar öffnen
  89. Lopatka, R.: Subsidiarity: Bridging the gap between the ideal and reality, in: European View, 18 (spring), 2019, p. 26–36. Google Scholar öffnen
  90. Cited: Lopatka, in: European View, 18 (spring), 2019, 26, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  91. Madiega, T.: Reform of the EU liability regime for online intermediaries: Background on the forthcoming digital services act, In-depth analysis of the European Parliamentary Research Service, Brussel 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/649404/EPRS_IDA(2020)649404_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  92. Cited: Madiega (EPRS study), Reform of the EU liability regime for online intermediaries. Google Scholar öffnen
  93. Matulionyte, R.: Enforcing Copyright Infringements Online: In Search of Balanced Private International Law Rules, in: Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law (JIPITEC), 6 (2), 2015, p. 132–145. Google Scholar öffnen
  94. Cited: Matulionyte, in: JIPITEC, 6 (2), 2015, 132, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  95. Montagnani, M. L.; Trapova, A.: New Obligations for Internet Intermediaries in the Digital Single Market – Safe Harbors in Turmoil?, in: Journal of Internet Law (JIL), 22 (7), 2019, p. 3–11. Google Scholar öffnen
  96. Cited: Montagnani/Trapova, in: JIL, 22 (7), 2019, 3, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  97. Mulligan, D.; Bamberger, K.: Saving Governance-By-Design, in: California Law Review (CLR), 106, 2018, p. 698–772. Google Scholar öffnen
  98. Cited: Mulligan/Bamberger, in: CLR, 106, 2018, 698, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  99. Nettesheim, M.: Normenhierarchie im EU-Recht, in: Europarecht (EuR), 41 (6), 2006, p. 737–772. Google Scholar öffnen
  100. Cited: Nettesheim, in: EuR, 41 (6), 2006, 737, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  101. Nordemann, J. B.: Internal Market for digital services: Responsibilities and duties of care of providers of digital services, Study for the European Parliament Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648802/IPOL_STU(2020)648802_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  102. Cited: Nordemann, Internal Market for digital services: Responsibilities and duties of care of providers of digital services. Google Scholar öffnen
  103. Oster, J.: Communication, defamation and liability of intermediaries, in: Legal Studies, 35, 2015, p. 348–368. Google Scholar öffnen
  104. Cited: Oster in: Legal Studies, 35, 2015, 348, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  105. Penney, J. W.: Internet surveillance, regulation, and chilling effects online: a comparative case study, in: Internet Policy Review (IPR), 6 (2), 2017, https://doi.org/10.14763/2017.2.692. Google Scholar öffnen
  106. Cited: Penney, in: IPR, 6 (2), 2017. Google Scholar öffnen
  107. Petkova, B.; Ojanen, T. (eds.): Fundamental Rights Protection Online: The Future Regulation of Intermediaries, Cheltenham 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  108. Cited: author, “title”, in: Petkova/Ojanen (eds.), p. Google Scholar öffnen
  109. Quintais, J.: Global Online Piracy – Study Legal Background Report, Amsterdam 2018, https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Global-Online-Piracy-Study-Legal-Background-Report.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  110. Cited: Quintais, Global Online Piracy – Study Legal Background Report. Google Scholar öffnen
  111. Quaglio, G.; Miller, S.: Potentially negative effects of internet use, In-depth analysis of the European Parliamentary Research Service, Brussels 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  112. Cited: Quaglio/Miller (EPRS analysis), Potentially negative effects of the internet use. Google Scholar öffnen
  113. Rowland, D.; Kohl, U.; Charlesworth, A.: Information Technology Law, 5th edition, London 2016. Google Scholar öffnen
  114. Cited: Rowland/Kohl/Charlesworth, Information Technology Law. Google Scholar öffnen
  115. Sartor, G.: New aspects and challenges in consumer protection, Study for the committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648790/IPOL_STU(2020)648790_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  116. Cited: Sartor, New aspects and challenges in consumer protection. Google Scholar öffnen
  117. Savin, A.: EU Internet Law, Cheltenham 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
  118. Cited: Savin, EU Internet Law. Google Scholar öffnen
  119. Schulte-Nölke, H.; Rüffer, I.; Nobrega, C.; Wiewórowska-Domagalska, A.: The legal framework for e-commerce in the Internal Market, Study for the committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/652707/IPOL_STU(2020)652707_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  120. Cited: Schulte-Nölke et al., The legal framework for e-commerce in the Internal Market. Google Scholar öffnen
  121. Schwartz, I.: Subsidiarität und EG-Kompetenzen – der neue Titel „Kultur“-Medienvielfalt und Binnenmarkt, in: AfP, 24 (1) 1993, p. 409–421. Google Scholar öffnen
  122. Cited: Schwartz, in: AfP 24 (1), 1993, 409, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  123. Senftleben, M.; Angelopoulos, C.: The Odyssey of the Prohibition on General Monitoring Obligations on the Way to the Digital Services Act, Amsterdam 2020, https://www.ivir.nl/new-study-the-odyssey-of-the-prohibition-on-general-monitoring-obligations-on-the-way-to-the-digital-services-act/. Google Scholar öffnen
  124. Cited: Senftleben/Angelopoulus, The Odyssey of the Prohibition on General Monitoring Obligations on the Way to the Digital Services Act. Google Scholar öffnen
  125. Smit, S. J.: SME focus – Long-term strategy for the European industrial future, Study for the committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE), Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648776/IPOL_STU(2020)648776_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  126. Cited: Smit, SME focus – Long term strategy for the European industrial future. Google Scholar öffnen
  127. Smith, M.: Enforcement and cooperation between Member States in a Digital Services Act, Study for the Committee on Internal Market, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648780/IPOL_STU(2020)648780_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  128. Cited: Smith, Enforcement and cooperation between Member States. Google Scholar öffnen
  129. Sohnemann, N.; Uffrecht, L. M.; Hartkopf, M. C.; Kruse, J. P.; Noellen, L. M.: New Developments in Digital Services, Study for the committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg 2020, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648784/IPOL_STU(2020)648784_EN.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  130. Cited: Sohnemann et al., New Developments in Digital Services. Google Scholar öffnen
  131. Spindler, G.: Internet Intermediary Liability Reloaded – The New German Act on Responsibility of Social Networks and its (In ) Compatibility with European Law, in: JIPITEC, 8 (2), 2017, 166-179. Google Scholar öffnen
  132. Cited: Spindler, in: JIPITEC, 8 (2), 2017, 166, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  133. Svantesson, D.: European Union Claims of Jurisdiction over the Internet: An Analysis of Three Recent Key Developments, in: JIPITEC, 9 (2), 2018, p. 113–125. Google Scholar öffnen
  134. Cited: Svantesson, in: JIPITEC, 9 (2), 2018, 113, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  135. Ukrow, J.: Die Vorschläge der EU-Kommission für einen Digital Services Act und einen Digital Markets Act. Darstellung von und erste Überlegungen zu zentralen Bausteinen für eine digitale Grundordnung der EU, in: Impulse aus dem EMR, Saarbruecken 2021, https://emr-sb.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Impulse-aus-dem-EMR_DMA-und-DSA.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  136. Cited: Ukrow, Die Vorschläge der EU-Kommission für einen Digital Services Act und einen Digital Markets Act. Google Scholar öffnen
  137. Ukrow, J.: Indexierung des Rundfunkbeitrags und Stabilität der deutschen Rundfunkfinanzierung. Ansätze einer europarechtlichen Risikoanalyse, in: UFITA, 83 (1), 2019, 279–330, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  138. Cited: Ukrow, in: UFITA, 83 (1), 2019, 279, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  139. Ullrich, C.: Unlawful Content Online: Towards a New Regulatory Framework for Online Platforms, Luxembourg 2020. Google Scholar öffnen
  140. Cited: Ullrich, Unlawful Content Online: Towards a New Regulatory Framework for Online Platforms. Google Scholar öffnen
  141. Ullrich, C.: New Approach meets new economy: Enforcing EU product safety in e-commerce, in: Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ), 26 (4), 2019, p. 558–584. Google Scholar öffnen
  142. Cited: Ullrich, in: MJ, 26 (4), 2019, 558, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  143. Ullrich, C.: A Risk-Based Approach towards Infringement Prevention on the Internet: Adopting the Anti-Money Laundering Framework to Online Platforms, in: IJLIT, 26 (3), 2018, p. 226–251. Google Scholar öffnen
  144. Cited: Ullrich, in: IJLIT, 26 (3), 2018, 226, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  145. Ullrich, C.: Standards for Duty of Care? Debating Intermediary Liability from a Sectoral Perspective, in: Journal of Intellectual Property, in: JIPITEC, 8 (2), 2017, p. 111–126. Google Scholar öffnen
  146. Cited: Ullrich, in: JIPITEC, 8 (2), 2017, 111, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  147. Vamialis, A.: Online Defamation: Confronting Anonymity, in: IJLIT, 21 (1), 2013, p. 56–62. Google Scholar öffnen
  148. Cited: Vamialis, in: IJLIT, 21 (1), 2013, 56, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  149. van Eecke, P.: Online Service Providers and Liability: A Plea for a Balanced Approach, in: Common Market Law Review, 48 (5), 2011, p. 1455–1502. Google Scholar öffnen
  150. Cited: van Eecke, in: Common Market L. Rev., 48 (5), 2011, 1455, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  151. van Hoboken, J.; Quintas, J. P.; Poort, J.; van Eijk, N.: Hosting intermediary services and illegal content online. An analysis of the scope of Article 14 ECD in light of developments in the online service landscape, SMART 2018/0033, Amsterdam 2018, https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/hosting_intermediary_services.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  152. Cited: van Hoboken et al., Hosting intermediary services and illegal content online. Google Scholar öffnen
  153. Vlassis, A.: The review of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive. Many political voices for one digital Europe?, in: Politique européenne, 56 (2), 2017, p. 102–123. Google Scholar öffnen
  154. Cited: Vlassis, in: Politique européenne, 56 (2), 2017, 102, p. Google Scholar öffnen
  155. Waldheim, S.: Dienstleistungsfreiheit und Herkunftslandprinzip: Prinzipielle Möglichkeiten und primärrechtliche Grenzen der Liberalisierung eines integrierten europäischen Binnenmarktes für Dienstleistungen, Göttingen 2008. Google Scholar öffnen
  156. Cited: Waldheim, Dienstleistungsfreiheit und Herkunftslandprinzip. Google Scholar öffnen
  157. Woods, L.: The proposed Digital Markets Act: overview and analysis, in: EU Law Analysis, 14 January 2021, http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-proposed-digital-markets-act.html. Google Scholar öffnen
  158. Cited: Woods, The proposed Digital Markets Act: overview and analysis. Google Scholar öffnen
  159. Woods, L.: Overview of Digital Services Act, in: EU Law Analysis, 16 December 2020, http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2020/12/overview-of-digital-services-act.html. Google Scholar öffnen
  160. Cited: Woods, Overview of Digital Services Act. Google Scholar öffnen
  161. Woods, L.; Perrin, W.: Online harm reduction – a statutory duty of care and regulator, Dunfermline 2019, https://d1ssu070pg2v9i.cloudfront.net/pex/carnegie_uk_trust/2019/04/08091652/Online-harm-reduction-a-statutory-duty-of-care-and-regulator.pdf. Google Scholar öffnen
  162. Cited: Woods/Perrin, Online harm reduction – a statutory duty of care and regulator. Google Scholar öffnen

Ähnliche Veröffentlichungen

aus dem Schwerpunkt "Urheberrecht & Medienrecht", "Computer und Internet", "Medienpolitik & Medienethik"
Cover des Buchs: Der Verbraucherschadensersatzanspruch gemäß § 9 Absatz 2 UWG
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Fabian Göllner
Der Verbraucherschadensersatzanspruch gemäß § 9 Absatz 2 UWG
Cover des Buchs: Die Beurteilung von Faktenchecks nach dem Äußerungsrecht
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Alexander Heimann
Die Beurteilung von Faktenchecks nach dem Äußerungsrecht
Cover des Buchs: Law & Critique | Recht & Kritik
Sammelband Vollzugriff
Greta Olson, Christian Schmidt, Benno Zabel, Jochen Bung, Franziska Martinsen, Hanna Meißner
Law & Critique | Recht & Kritik
Cover des Buchs: Ethik der Kryptographie
Monographie Vollzugriff
Laurence Lerch
Ethik der Kryptographie
Cover des Buchs: Israel in deutschen Medien
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Jonas Hessenauer, Lukas Uwira
Israel in deutschen Medien

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Feedback geben

Wir freuen uns über Ihr Feedback zu Inhalten und Funktionen. Ihre Nachricht hilft uns, unseren Service stetig zu verbessern.

Bewertung
Bild anhängen
oder hier ablegen
PNG oder JPG (max. 3 MB)

Anmelden

Passwort vergessen?
Login via Open Athens
Noch kein Benutzerkonto?
Jetzt registrieren

Publikation zitieren

Download: RIS BibTex