Politicians' liability for Facebook comments

Abstract Following the adoption of the Digital Services Act (DSA), a breakthrough legislation on platform regulation and content moderation, many were awaiting the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the Sanchez vs. France case. The main legal issue centred on whether the European-style safe harbour model and the accompanying ban on tracking or monitoring private users would apply. The Grand Chamber's judgment, however, has raised more questions than it has answered. In the present study, we argue that the Grand Chamber's decision in the Sanchez vs. France case represents a striking departure from previous ECtHR judgments and the principles set forth by the Court, particularly in the Delfi and Tamiz cases. We claim that as a result of the Sanchez judgment it may appear that certain individuals, such as public figures and politicians, may be subject to continuous monitoring to avoid liability for third-party comments on their social media pages.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies
Published
2024-12-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1556/2052.2024.00490
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.35

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Politicians' liability for Facebook comments

Gergely Gosztonyi, Gergely Ferenc Lendvai
1 citations
Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies
Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
0.35
article

Politicians' liability for Facebook comments

Gergely Gosztonyi, Gergely Ferenc Lendvai
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Following the adoption of the Digital Services Act (DSA), a breakthrough legislation on platform regulation and content moderation, many were awaiting the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the Sanchez vs. France case. The main legal issue centred on whether the European-style safe harbour model and the accompanying ban on tracking or monitoring private users would apply. The Grand Chamber's judgment, however, has raised more questions than it has answered. In the present study, we argue that the Grand Chamber's decision in the Sanchez vs. France case represents a striking departure from previous ECtHR judgments and the principles set forth by the Court, particularly in the Delfi and Tamiz cases. We claim that as a result of the Sanchez judgment it may appear that certain individuals, such as public figures and politicians, may be subject to continuous monitoring to avoid liability for third-party comments on their social media pages.

Hungarian Journal of Legal StudiesVol. 65(2)
Eötvös Loránd University (HU), Ludovika University of Public Service (HU)
Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, Nemzeti Kutatási, Fejlesztési és Innovaciós Alap
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
0.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Politicians' liability for Facebook comments — Gergely Gosztonyi, Gergely Ferenc Lendvai · Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS