Explore

Show in map
Court Decision

Corte Suprema [Supreme Court], Gimbutas, Carolina Valeria c/ Google Inc. s/daños y perjuicios

Expte. N° 40500/2009/CSl y otro, Cita Online: Id SAIJ: FA17000042, September 17, 2017
The Supreme Court ratified its holding in “ Rodr í guez ”: intermediaries are liable if they fail to act after acquiring actual knowledge about the unlawful nature of specific third-party infringing content. Moreover, the Court reiterated that thumbnails are merely filtered links that should not be treated differently from text search results. Further, search engines do not “capture”, “ reproduce ” or “commercialize” images under articles 31 of the Law 11.723 and 53 of the Civil and Commercial Code. Even if they did, in an extended opinion, Dr. Rosenkratz added that manifest consent to the storage of one’s image in a website implies consent to the indexation and linking of such website and its content by search engines.
Proposed Law

Legislative Proposal, 5771-D-2016

Intermediary Services on the Internet. Providers’ Responsibility Guidelines
Defines “intermediaries” as the ones that carry out or facilitate transactions between third parties on the Internet, whether they offer access to, hosting, transmission, or index content, products or services created by third parties. As a general principle, the text proposes that ISPs should not be liable for the information transmitted unless they modified it, and should not have the responsibility of supervising the content. The proposal determines that ISPs should be liable if they are notified and do not erase, deindex, block or remove “ flagrantly illegal content ” within five days. Cases of “ flagrantly illegal content ” are listed: child pornography; content that incites the commission of a crime; content that may put lives or physical integrity in danger; apology for genocide, racism, or discrimination; or...
Court Decision

F. D. S. c/ Google Inc y otro s/ medidas cautelares

Cámara Nacional de Apelaciones en lo Civil y Comercial Federal, Sala II [National Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, Federal District], Civil - incidente, Expte. N° 22592/2015/1/CA2, April 22, 2016
The lower court had entered an injunction ordering Google and Yahoo to remove all links and images related to plaintiff, a model who appeared in some photographs that initially surfaced on social media where she appeared next to a federal prosecutor, Alberto Nisman, whose highly publicized death was under criminal investigation. The Court acknowledged an overriding public interest in the information and the images at issue. The fundamental rights to freedom of expression and access to information, under these circumstances, outweighed the right to privacy and publicity. Moreover, the Court recognized that some of the URLs identified by the plaintiff belonged to journalistic media. Then, according to the decision, the plaintiff should have sued those sufficiently identified media outlets instead of the defendant search...
Proposed Law

Legislative Proposal, 942-S-2016

Intermediary Services on the Internet. Providers’ Responsibility Guidelines
This legislation would codify responsibility of intermediaries for content posted by users. It defines ISPs; access, interconnection, transmission and data addressing providers; automatic storage or cache services providers; hosting providers; link, search and content or information directories services providers; and content. The proposal states that providers should not be liable for the transmitted information, unless they originally transmitted it or modified it, or have effective knowledge of the illegality of the content. The proposal also determines that it cannot limit the capacity of ISPs to contract with its users on their own terms and conditions (“self-regulation”) including provisions for alternative mechanisms for notification, removal, interruption, blocking, or management of offending content. However,...
Court Decision

C. de P., M.G. y otros c/ Google Inc. y otro s/ medidas cautelares

Cámara Nacional de Apelaciones en lo Civil de la Capital Federal, Sala III [National Civil Court of Appeals, Buenos Aires Capital District], Cita Online: MJ-JU-M-97758-AR, March 11, 2016
The president of the Make a Wish Foundation in Argentina sought a preliminary injunction against Google for the removal of a defamatory blog post and other websites that republished it. The Court affirmed the judgment denying the injunction. According to the decision, the allegedly defamatory content was a matter of public concern because it pertained to the foundation’s fundraising activities and management of donations, and plaintiff had failed to prove falsity as part of her prima facie case. The Court held that it would be unreasonable to enter a preliminary injunction against Google, requiring deindexing of the blog, when the owner of the blog could have contested plaintiff’s allegations had he been named defendant to the lawsuit.
Court Decision

De Priete Yamila Daiana c/ Google Inc. y otro s/ medidas cautelares

Cámara de Apelaciones en lo Civil, Sala H, [National Civil Court of Appeals] - Incidente civil, Expte. N° 22595/2015, February, 2016
The plaintiff requested the blocking of any link to web sites in which photographs obtained from her Facebook account were published. This request was related to the news regarding the death of Alberto Nisman, an Argentine prosecutor. The Court rejected the request. First, according to the Court, the "highest disclosure of public information" principle prevailed as it was a case of public interest. There was a general interest to have access to this information. Second, the Court stated that Facebook's main objective consisted in sharing images and events. Consequently, limits to privacy had to be cautiously determined, especially when images relate to a case of public interest.