Legal model for combating information inaccurate on the internet (on the example of Australia)

 
PIIS102694520020522-5-1
DOI10.31857/S102694520020522-5
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation: Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: 10 Znamenka str., 119019 Moscow, Russia
Journal nameGosudarstvo i pravo
EditionIssue 6
Pages142-151
Abstract

A false sense of anonymity and impunity on the Internet leads to the emergence of such an offense as the dissemination of information that does not correspond to reality that violates the rights of third parties. Despite the legal responsibility for such actions, the number of such offenses on the Internet does not decrease. The Internet brings its own specifics to the regulation of emerging relations, for example, to determine the place and source of publication, the identity of the publisher requires information about all ongoing activity on the Internet, which is stored by Internet intermediaries. Accordingly, the system of organizational and legal mechanisms for regulating Internet relations should take into account the technological specifics of the activities of various Internet intermediaries. In the article analyzes the main changes in Australian legislation aimed at determining the responsibility of Internet intermediaries for the dissemination of information that does not correspond to reality; the stages of the formation of an organizational and legal system for preventing the dissemination of this information in the Australian segment of the Internet, as well as law enforcement practice.

Keywordsinternet platforms, search engines, slander, information that does not correspond to reality, Safe Harbor, content
Received13.12.2021
Publication date20.06.2022
Number of characters33469
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 442

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Gavrilov E.V. Zaschita delovoj reputatsii ot diffamatsii na internet-forumakh // Pravo v sfere Interneta: sb. st. / otv. red. M.A. Rozhkova. M., 2018.

2. Egorova N.A. Novoe v ugolovno-pravovom protivodejstvii klevete // Zakonnost'. 2021. № 3. S. 41 - 45.

3. Karpenkov V. Zaschita delovoj reputatsii v seti Internet // Bibliotechka zhurnala «Yurist». Pravo i biznes. 2015. № 3. S. 21.

4. Parygina N.N. Zaschita prava na delovuyu reputatsiyu yuridicheskikh lits i individual'nykh predprinimatelej po grazhdanskomu zakonodatel'stvu Rossijskoj Federatsii: dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. Omsk, 2017. S. 137.

5. Tereschenko L.K. Global'naya set': problemy v prave // Ross. yustitsiya. 2000. № 2. S. 49, 50.

6. Kharitonov I.I. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost' za klevetu: dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2015. S. 165 - 168.

7. Chebotareva A.A. Prava grazhdan v kontekste deyatel'nosti sredstv massovoj informatsii, funktsioniruyuschikh v seti Internet // Yuridicheskij mir. 2007. № 3. S. 4.

8. Australia: Media Regulatory Reform Update. URL: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4ca563d0-0750-4eb3-8e26-a02a241093f5 (data obrascheniya: 20.09.2021).

9. Australia to get digital platforms watchdog. URL: https://www.governmentnews.com.au/australia-to-get-digital-platforms-watchdog/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20outcomes%20of%20the%20pilot,their%20services%2C%E2%80%9D%20it%20says (data obrascheniya: 10.11.2021).

10. Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), “Annual Reports: 2019 - 2020”. URL: https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-10/ACMA%20and%20eSa (data obrascheniya: 30.11.2021).

11. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Digital Platforms Inquiry: Final report 2019. URL: https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/digital-platforms-inquiry-finalreport, p. 63 (data obrascheniya: 30.10.2021).

12. Centre for Media Transition. URL: https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20commissioned%20report%20%20The%20impact%20of%20digital%20platforms%20on%20news%20and%20journalistic%20content%2C%20Centre%20for%20Media%20Transition%20%282%29.pdf (data obrascheniya: 17.10.2021).

13. Columbia University: Global Freedom of Expression, “Trkulja v. Google LLC”. June 13, 2018. URL: https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/trkulja-v-google-l (data obrascheniya: 19.11.2021).

14. Digital platforms inquiry - final report. URL: https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/digital-platforms-inquiry-final-report (data obrascheniya: 20.11.2021).

15. How do online platforms shape our lives and businesses? – Brochure. URL: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/how-do-online-platforms-shape-our-lives-and-businesses-brochure (data obrascheniya: 19.10.2021).

16. Johnson A., Castro D. How Other Countries Have Dealt with Intermediary Liability, Feb. 22, 2021. URL: https://itif.org/publications/2021/02/22/how-other-countries-have-dealt-intermediary-liability (data obrascheniya: 05.10.2021).

17. Madiega T. Reform of the EU liability regime for online intermediaries Background on the forthcoming digital services act. URL: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/649404/EPRS_IDA (2020)649404_EN.pdf (data obrascheniya: 12.11.2021).

18. Review of Model Defamation Provisions - Discussion Paper. February 2019. URL: https://www.justice.nsw.gov.au/justicepolicy/Documents/review-model-defamation-provisions/Final-CAG-Defamation-Discussion-Paper-Feb-2019.pdf

19. SBS submission to Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Digital Platforms Inquiry: Preliminary Report February. URL: 2019https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Special%20Broadcasting%20Service%20%28February%202019%29.PDF (data obrascheniya: 10.10.2021).

20. Safe harbour rules Australia’s new copyright battleground. URL: https://www.computerworld.com/article/3464946/safe-harbour-rules-australia-s-new-copyright-battleground.html (data obrascheniya: 30.11.2021).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up