TY - JOUR
T1 - Unblocking the Digital Economy Act 2010
T2 - human rights issues in the UK
AU - Romero Moreno, Felipe
N1 - This is the accepted manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Review of Law, Computers and Technology on 21 March 2013.
The version of record [Romero-Moreno, F. (2013) ‘Unblocking the Digital Economy Act 2010, human rights issues in the UK’, International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 27(1-2): 18-45, first published on line March 21, 2013] is available online via doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2013.764149
PY - 2013/3/21
Y1 - 2013/3/21
N2 - Through an example of a study utilizing the case-law research method, this paper critically assesses whether taking into account both the findings of Mr La Rue (the United Nations Rapporteur on Human Rights) as well as some Court of Justice of the European Union's (CJEU) case-law, website blocking could be implemented in a way which is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), in particular, with Article 10. Drawing upon, inter alia, Ofcom site blocking review, sections 17 and 18 of the Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA), section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA), and some independent expert evidence, this paper's major argument is that in view of the CJEU SABAM v Scarlet and SABAM v Netlog, the UK government's decision to repeal the website blocking provisions of the DEA appears appropriate. The paper examines the findings of Fox v BT. It contrasts such findings with the CJEU's case-law and in light of the incompatibility of any website blocking measure with the cumulative three-part test set out in the United Nations Rapporteur on Human Rights discusses a number of implications. It concludes that given that the implementation of content blocking systems, such as Cleanfeed is likely to result in general monitoring being carried out; the UK government could possibly be in breach of EU law, namely, Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31.
AB - Through an example of a study utilizing the case-law research method, this paper critically assesses whether taking into account both the findings of Mr La Rue (the United Nations Rapporteur on Human Rights) as well as some Court of Justice of the European Union's (CJEU) case-law, website blocking could be implemented in a way which is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), in particular, with Article 10. Drawing upon, inter alia, Ofcom site blocking review, sections 17 and 18 of the Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA), section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA), and some independent expert evidence, this paper's major argument is that in view of the CJEU SABAM v Scarlet and SABAM v Netlog, the UK government's decision to repeal the website blocking provisions of the DEA appears appropriate. The paper examines the findings of Fox v BT. It contrasts such findings with the CJEU's case-law and in light of the incompatibility of any website blocking measure with the cumulative three-part test set out in the United Nations Rapporteur on Human Rights discusses a number of implications. It concludes that given that the implementation of content blocking systems, such as Cleanfeed is likely to result in general monitoring being carried out; the UK government could possibly be in breach of EU law, namely, Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31.
KW - website blocking orders
KW - Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA)
KW - freedom of expresion
KW - copyright
KW - file sharing
KW - UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the internet
KW - Article 10 ECHR
KW - section 97A CDPA
U2 - 10.1080/13600869.2013.764149
DO - 10.1080/13600869.2013.764149
M3 - Article
SN - 1360-0869
VL - 27
SP - 18
EP - 45
JO - International Review of Law, Computers & Technology
JF - International Review of Law, Computers & Technology
IS - 1-2
ER -