EXEMPTION FROM LIABILITY AND PROHIBITION OF GENERAL MONITORING OBLIGATIONS AS GUARANTEES FOR INTERNET INTERMEDIARIES’ PARTICIPATION IN CIVIL RELATIONS

Keywords: internet intermediaries, exemption from liability, liability of internet intermediaries, “safe harbour” regime, prohibition of general monitoring, CJEU case law, Ukrainian legislation, Digital Services Act

Abstract

This article examines the legal regulation of internet intermediaries’ participation in civil relations, focusing on the regimes of exemption from liability and the prohibition on general monitoring obligations. The study analyzes the historical preconditions and reasons for introducing these legal mechanisms and assesses their impact on the development of the digital economy and user rights protection. Particular attention is paid to key aspects of European Union legislation, including the E-Commerce Directive and the Digital Services Act, which establish the fundamental principles of intermediary liability. Special emphasis is placed on analyzing the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which clarifies the limits of monitoring obligations and ensures a balance between freedom of expression, intellectual property rights, and business interests. The article highlights the specific features of Ukrainian legislation, including provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Electronic Commerce" and the updated Law of Ukraine "On Copyright and Related Rights." The study substantiates that exemption from liability is a critical element of intermediaries’ functioning. Together with the prohibition of general monitoring, these two mechanisms constitute essential legal guarantees enabling intermediaries’ participation in civil relations. The author stresses the importance of further harmonizing Ukrainian legislation with European standards to ensure intermediaries’ effective participation in legal relations. The findings can be utilized to improve the legal regulation of internet intermediaries and to develop new approaches for governing the digital environment in Ukraine.

References

1. Belgische Vereniging van Auteurs, Componisten en Uitgevers CVBA (SABAM) v Netlog NV. [2012]. CJEU Case C-360/10. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:62010CJ0360
2. Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited. [2019]. CJEU Case C-18/18. Retrieved from https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?num=C-18/18
3. European Commission. (1997). A European initiative in electronic commerce. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:51997DC0157
4. European Commission. (2003). First report on the application of the E-Commerce Directive. Retrieved from https://aei.pitt.edu/46299/1/COM_(2003)_702_final.pdf
5. European Commission. (2014). Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX-%3A22014A0529(01)
6. European Parliament. (1998). Resolution on electronic commerce. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A51998IP0173
7. Frosio, G. (2017). From horizontal to vertical: An intermediary liability earthquake in Europe. Oxford Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, 12, 565. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2956859
8. Johnson, A., Castro, D. (2021). How other countries have dealt with intermediary liability. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Retrieved from https://itif.org/publications/2021/02/22/how-other-countries-have-dealt-intermediary-liability/
9. L’Oréal SA and Others v eBay International AG and Others. [2011]. CJEU Case C-324/09. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX-%3A62009CJ0324
10. Madiega, T. (2020). Reform of the EU liability regime for online intermediaries: Background on the forthcoming Digital Services Act. European Parliamentary Research Service. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/649404/EPRS_IDA(2020)649404_EN.pdf
11. OECD. (2011). The role of internet intermediaries in advancing public policy objectives.
12. Oxford Economics (2022). The State of the Creator Economy. YouTube US Impact Report 2022.
13. Pro avtorske pravo і sumіzhni prava: Zakon Ukrayiny vіd 01.12.2022 № 2811-IX. (2022). [The Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights] URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2811-20#Text (data zvernennia: 20.12.2024) [In Ukrainian]
14. Pro avtorske pravo і sumіzhni prava: Zakon Ukrayiny vіd 23.12.1993, № 3793-XI. VVR. 1994 (redaktsіya Zakonu № 1977-VIII vіd 23.03.2017). (2017). [The Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights; version as of March 23, 2017] URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3792-12#Text (data zvernennia: 20.12.2024) [In Ukrainian]
15. Pro elektronnу komertsіyu: Zakon Ukrayiny vіd 03 veresnya 2015 r. № 675-VIII. (2015). [The Law of Ukraine “On Electronic Commerce”] URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/675-19#Text (data zvernennia: 20.12.2024) [In Ukrainian]
16. Republic of Poland v European Parliament and Council of the European Union. [2022]. CJEU Case C-401/19. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62019CJ0401
17. Riordan, J. (2013). The liability of internet intermediaries (Doctoral thesis, University of Oxford). Retrieved from https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:a593f15c-583f-4acf-a743-62ff0eca7bfe/files/mafc6abd2e765a00244a6cfb6838100db
18. Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM). [2011]. CJEU Case C-70/10. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62010CJ0070
19. Senftleben, M., & Angelopoulos, C. (2020). The odyssey of the prohibition on general monitoring obligations on the way to the Digital Services Act. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3717022
20. Sotiris Papasavvas v O Fileleftheros Dimosia Etaireia Ltd and Others. (2014) CJEU Case C-291/13. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX-%3A62013CJ0291
21. Tobias Mc Fadden v Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH. [2016]. CJEU Case C-484/14. Retrieved from https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=183363&pageIndex=0&doclang=en
22. Yahoo!, Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme, 169 F. Supp. 2d 1181 (N.D. Cal. 2001). Legal case repository: Case FSUPP2/169/1181. Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/169/1181/2423974

Abstract views: 12
PDF Downloads: 6
Published
2025-03-20
How to Cite
Haidai, K. (2025). EXEMPTION FROM LIABILITY AND PROHIBITION OF GENERAL MONITORING OBLIGATIONS AS GUARANTEES FOR INTERNET INTERMEDIARIES’ PARTICIPATION IN CIVIL RELATIONS. Scientific Journal of Polonia University, 67(6), 199-209. https://doi.org/10.23856/6726