Search
Search Results
-
Censorship as a Tool Against State Disinformation: Media Freedom Implications of the Russian-Ukrainian War
Views:63Disinformation campaigns originating from Russia have been frequently debated in recent years. Disinformation also plays a major role in the Russian–Ukrainian war that started in February 2022. The issue has been on the agenda in the European Union in recent years, so it is not surprising that among the many sanctions the EU introduced against Russia, action against disinformation was also added. This paper sets out to describe the previously unprecedented ban on Russian media service providers, including the problems the provision creates for freedom of expression. In particular, it will examine the content of the Decision and the Regulation, which prohibited the distribution of the Russian media outlets concerned and the consequences of the EU legislation. It will then go on to critically analyse the provisions from the perspective of freedom of expression, and finally, the relevant judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
-
’The more speech, the better’: Review of the Book of András Koltay on New Media and Freedom of Speech
Views:255At first glance, the new book of András Koltay seems to be a translation of his recently published volume, New Media and Freedom of Expression: Rethinking the Constitutional Foundations of the Public Sphere (Hart International, 2019). Therefore, one would expect that the work itself does not provide any new information to those who already know the original in English. That could not be less true. As we get to the bottom of this false impression, the review shows the many virtues and minor mistakes of the book.
-
Facebook files – is Hate Speech Deleted? The Human Rights As- pects of Content Control of Social Media Platforms
115-136Views:461The internet intermediaries, such as services like Google and Facebook became important actors who can influence the media supply through the personalised information flow tailored by their own algorithms and due to the content moderation of their own platforms. These services have exceeded their previous activities which were merely of an intermediary scope and this change affects substantially the fulfilment of international human rights standards. The article analysed first and foremost the operation of the internet intermediaries, especially of the social media platforms from the freedom of expression point of view. It seeks answers to the question to what extent does the moderation of the user generated content on the platforms, i.e. removing and blocking contents which do not comply with the terms and conditions of the platforms, comply with the requirements of the restriction of human rights. Based on the analysis of Facebook’s own regulatory framework, it evaluates content moderation activity on hate speech on the platform in the context of human rights. It points out the guarantees of human rights which are missing from the content control mechanisms of Facebook.
-
Neighbouring Rights of Press Publishers: Issues Relating to Transposition
Views:214Press publishers spend billions on producing quality journalism each year. While the costs of producing well supported, quality journalism manifest in producing the original content, i.e. the very first copy, further costs – due to digitization – are negligible. Parallel to this, prosperous business models thrive on re-using articles in press publications, as well as optimizing them for search and social media platforms attractive enough to generate huge amounts of advertising revenue. But not for the those who actually make the content. The European Union seeks to persuade large digital companies to take part in the financing of European content, mainly through competition law or by taking steps to improve the competitive position of European companies. The rules relating to press publishers of the EU Copyright Directive of 2019 intend to serve this purpose and will be analysed in this paper.
-
Public Hearing as a Safeguard of Fair Trial in Criminal Proceedings
46-61Views:148The primary aim of my paper is to examine the questions related to the institute of public hearing. As we know, publicity is one of the most important safeguards of fair trial in criminal procedure. In my opinion, it is necessary to examine these procedural questions in a scientific depth in the light of both the case decisions of the High Courts and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The study examines one of the important pledges of a fair trial, the effectiveness of the basic principle of publicity in the criminal procedure. It explores the principle from a dogmatic point of view, and also in the light of both the European standards and the regulations currently in force. It mentions the limitation and exclusion of publicity, and the legal consequences of violating publicity in a great detail. Classic legal institutes are shifted into new dimensions by the technical improvements of the modern world and the media broadcasts from courts, and the paper points it out that for the sake of having an undisturbed court hearing and verification, some modifications on certain legal regulations may be justified. The study also mentions the standpoints of legal literature regarding the notion of publicity in detail, and by summarizing them it attempts to define the notion of the given basic principle as per aspects of law science, considering the characteristics of the 21st century. After the establishment of law theory principles, besides introducing the regulation in force and touching upon court practice, my paper analyzes questions that are more and more current, especially due to the reports by the electronic media, which sometimes cannot only disturb the order of the court, but also the procedure of verification. So, after the examination of basic hypotheses and the legal institute, it draws the conclusion that the development of the legal institute justifies the modification of the procedural law in the future, especially in connection with informing the press.
-
The Value of Personal Data in the Competition Law Assessment of the Facebook–WhatsApp Merger Case
131-147Views:240The European Commission fined Facebook 110 million euros for giving misleading information within the merger procedure on acquiring the messaging service WhatsApp in 2014. The case reached a crossroad of competition law, data protection and consumer law. This was the first time the Commission imposed a fine on a company for inaccurate information since the merger regulation rules were established in 2004. Some authors criticized not only the Commission’s decision from 2017 which imposed the fine, but also the decision from 2014 in which the Commission had decided not to oppose the transaction. Some authors oppose tackling data collection issues through competition law, but some authors raise the question: is competition law enough to consider the case when personal data are involved, too? The controversial part of the decision is not about data protection law, but about the value of personal data from the perspective of competition law.
-
The Criminalisation of Active Bribery of Public Officials: A New KOL Research in Hungary
9-29Views:241The aim of the three-year project “Novelties of Criminal Law in Legal Consciousness” was to measure the knowledge and attitudes of lay people concerning criminal law including regulatory novelties with a questionnaire-based survey. In this paper, the authors analyse the responses to questions related to active bribery of public officials. The research has verified our hypothesis that the average person has a fragmented knowledge even about this sector of criminal law. However, this is partly due to the fact that the respondents – compared to the differentiation of the legal regulation – usually have schematic knowledge on the topic. The answers were strongly influenced by attitudes towards this type of criminality. It was not substantiated, however, that this knowledge is substantially affected by socio-economic factors, by media consumption or by encountering criminality. Our hypothesis regarding the novelty of regulation has been only partially proven: there are more than three times more people whose answers reflect the old regulation than the new one. However, this was not necessarily due to actual knowledge of the older regulation, but rather to the fact that it was more in line with respondents insensitivity to legal distinctions.
-
The main factors influencing the level of the knowledge of law
71-95Views:175The paper deals with the level of legal knowledge among the Hungarian population measured with a representative survey asking questions regarding the knowledge of certain constitutional, civil, administrative and procedural legal rules releant in everyday life. Our findings are compared to a research carried out in 1965, using the same questions. Furthermore we analysed the relationship of knowledge level as a dependent variable with (i) socio-demographic (gender, age, education, etc.), (ii) media consumption (some 30 written, electronic and internet-based items), (iii) interaction with the legal system (read a law, consulted with a lawyer, participated in a trial) and (iv) civic activity. We found that the level of education is crucial, and interaction with the legal system has some additional significant impact, too. All other independent variables seem to have less significance or no impact at all. The relative strength of explanatory variables has largely changed in the past decades and in some cases even the direction of impact altered (for example women seem to be more educated about the law nowadays, in a sharp contrast to the 1965 data.)