Wanting at all costs to patch up an Avia law, widely criticized by the media and censored by the Constitutional Council, leads to an impasse.
Because piling up texts that try to force social networks to make hate speech themselves is to forget that these same actors are legally irresponsible.
They are, in fact, protected by a status of simple host of the contents which circulate on their networks.
This status was defined at the end of the 1990s, during the early days of the internet.
To read also:
Hatred online: the assassination of Samuel Paty revives the debate around an "Avia law" in France
In the United States, section 230 and in Europe the e-commerce directive, guarantee them a kind of impunity.
But today, on both sides of the Atlantic, a consensus is emerging.
The best way to regulate hate speech on social networks would be to apply the same a priori liability regime as the media;
that of content editor.
This statute stipulates that when a medium publishes hateful or defamatory speech,
This article is for subscribers only.
You have 69% left to discover.
Subscribe: 1 € the first month
Can be canceled at any time
Enter your email
Already subscribed?
Log in
