Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/218939 
Year of Publication: 
2020
Citation: 
[Journal:] Internet Policy Review [ISSN:] 2197-6775 [Volume:] 9 [Issue:] 2 [Publisher:] Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society [Place:] Berlin [Year:] 2020 [Pages:] 1-20
Publisher: 
Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society, Berlin
Abstract: 
A private order of public communication has emerged. Today, social network services fulfill important communicative functions. A lot has been written about the failings of companies in deleting problematic content. This paper flips the question and asks under which conditions users can sue to reinstate content and under which circumstances courts have recognised "must carry" obligations for social network services. Our analysis, an initial comparative analysis of case law on the reinstatement of user-generated content, will point to a larger issue of systemic relevance, namely the differences in treatment of states and private companies as threats to and/or guarantors of fundamental rights in the United States and in Germany. It is a contribution to the important debate on the interaction of states and platforms in governing online content.
Subjects: 
Platforms
Intermediaries
Private spaces
Courts
Indirect application of human rights
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.