Subsidiariteit

In 1.2.1, bij de begripsbepaling van anonimiteit en pseudonimiteit, is aan bod gekomen dat gebruikers nu op online sociale mediaplatforms relatief pseudoniem zijn ten opzichte van de overheid. Het WODC-rapport dat werd geschreven na de ongeldigverklaring van de Dataretentierichtlijn in Digital Rights Ireland, concludeerde dat identificatie op basis van IP-adres over vaste netwerken ‘over het algemeen goed mogelijk is’, en dat de mogelijkheden voor identificatie van gebruikers op mobiele netwerken sterk verschillen per operator.149 Als meest voor de hand liggende oplossing noemen de auteurs van het rapport de uitrol van internetprotocol versie 6(IPv6). IPv6 biedt langere IP-adressen waardoor er meer beschikbaar zullen zijn; dit zorgt er voor dat er niet meerdere gebruikers hetzelfde IP-adres delen.150 Zo zou eén op eén-identificatie ook bij gebruikers van mobiele netwerken mogelijk worden. 151 Dit alternatief is een stuk effectiever dan het verbod op platformanonimiteit zoals besproken in 4.1.2. en constitueert een minder zware inmenging in de vrijheid van meningsuiting van burgerjournalisten.

5. Conclusie

149 _{WODC 2018, p. 10.} 150 _Idem.

39 Geconcludeerd kan worden dat burgerjournalisten afhankelijk van hun activiteiten een rol als publieke waakhond toekomt en het verbod er voor zorgt dat zij zich bij inwerkingtreding van het verbod terughoudend zullen opstellen, of zich helemaal niet meer registreren. Zo kunnen zij niet profiteren van het enorme bereik die deze platforms hen bieden.

De publieke winst die behaald wordt, die zit in de mindere beschikbaarheid van hate speech op deze platforms, is minimaal. Er is een ander, minder vergaand alternatief voorhanden die ook nog effectiever is: de uitrol van IPv6.

5.1. Discussie

Alhoewel een dergelijk verbod, gelet op bovenstaande, wellicht ongeldig verklaard zal worden door het HvJ EU, is het zorgelijk dat de taak van de wetgever, het stellen en handhaven van regels, lijkt te verschuiven naar online sociale mediaplatforms zelf.

De uitspraak in Delfi zorgt er bijvoorbeeld voor dat nieuwssites die niet de capaciteit hebben om elke reactie van te voren te screenen zich genoodzaakt zullen zien pseudonieme reacties niet meer toe te staan. Ook zelfreguleringsinitiatieven dragen hier aan bij. Democratische wetgevingsprocessen worden op deze manier niet gevolgd en de ‘uit vrije wil’ genomen maatregelen van online sociale mediaplatforms die de vrijheid van meningsuiting aanzienlijk kunnen beperken worden niet getoetst door een rechter.

40 Annex I Ref. Ares(2020)3768345 - 16/07/2020 Ref. Ares(2020)2743589 - 27/05/2020 Axel Voss

Member of the European Parliament

Protocol - Meeting on anonymity and liability of platforms

When: Monday, 02.03.2020 16:45-18:00

Where: European Parliament (ASP A3F383)

Key speakers: 1. - VDE e.V. 2. - Presentations on:

1. Erosion of trust through AI-based automated bots / fake news and countermeasures

that

preserve anonymity )

2. Labelling ethical characteristics of AI systems and assessing application risk )

3. The dysfunctionality of provider accountability within the E-Commerce Directive or: Why we

cannot regulate anything online, and what we need to do to change this. ( )

1. Erosion of trust through AI-based automated bots / fake news and countermeasures

that preserve anonymity ( )

Main focus: How to deal with deep fakes created by AI technologies that can fabricate

almost any format (video, audio, text/conversation, profiles). When used together these AI driven tools makes a comprehensive and targeted manipulation of the digital sphere possible.

41

• Thus, AI-based forgery tools can be used to shape public opinion by e.g. faking news websites and journals

This has severe consequences for citizens, democracy & legal system, businesses and platforms, as it could mean:

• Inability to distinguish truth from lies in the digital sphere

• Suffocation of political discourse and constructive consensus building / loss of trust in the legal system

• Undermining quality standards and reputation due to fakes

• Platforms flooded by fake content with a risk of liability and loss of reputation

: Does not support a solution using AI tools themselves for detecting

fakes generated by AI technology because this would ultimately cause a “at best an

arms race” xel Voss

Member of the European Parliament

Solution: Instead, there is a need for “authentic pseudonyms”, linking a person’s profile on

the internet with the specific ID cart, ensuring that every online profile represents an identifiable person.

• This would make it possible to validate and verify the trustworthiness of an information and its source

• Authentic pseudonyms will not necessarily be a solution for hate speech and propaganda on the internet but will prevent the usage of AI technology for shaping public opinion in an easy and cheap way (e.g. by using bots)

• On the other hand, identification systems are not supposed to reveal more

information than necessary, for instance only revealing that a profile is linked to a real person and not the specific name right away

• Overall aim is to ensure that the interaction on social media / the internet is not with an AI driven technology but with a real person

• Authentic pseudonyms would also mean that once a verified account is blocked (e.g. due to hate speech), it will not be possible to simply create a new one right away. Issues regarding the “freedom of speech” have then be solved by courts.

1. Labelling ethical characteristics of AI systems and assessing application

risk )

Main focus: Instead of using explicit and strict ethical rules for AI technology the overall aim

should be to develop a viable, flexible and strong framework of certain criteria and indicators making a labelling of AI technology possible.

Ethics rating refers to the use of a certain set of values such as transparency, accountability,

privacy, justice, reliability, environmental sustainability to rate a certain AI driven technology. The decision whether the AI technology should be used within a specific context is then based on a certain score.

• Ethics rating is used for a general risk assessment, e.g. once an AI technology is identified as high risk technology, the criteria and requirements applied afterwards will be much stricter

42

• Main advantage: Risk assessment links the usage of a certain AI technology to the specific context in which it will be employed.

Classification of the application context with risk levels

• Instead of using a scale of high and low risk assessment (concerning the potential harm caused by the specific AI technology) one also has to take into account the context in which the AI application is used (e.g. how much do we depend on the decision made by the AI technology)

• This is far more practical than a sector-based low / high risk approach

• Thus, in terms of liability, the operator must be held accountable too as the operator is responsible for deciding in which specific context AI will be used

43

Member of the European Parliament

Practical implementation

• The operator of an AI technology follows a simple “triage” checklist to determine the risk level. Most use of AI technologies are likely to end up at the low risk stage (60-70 %)

• Once a technology is classified as high risk, regulators demand that the AI system used must carry an ethics rating and satisfy a certain minimum levels within the ethics rating

• Thus, consumer can use the ethics rating to compare AI products and services to make an informed decision

• Manufactures will gain a market advantage by achieving high ethics ratings on their products (internal motivation)

• Purchasers (private and public sector procurement) can use the ethics rating and risk level or create a clear specification and they will benefit from market transparency

2. The dysfunctionality of provider accountability within the E-Commerce Directive or: Why we cannot regulate anything online, and what we need to do to change this. (

)

Main focus: Most problems we see on platforms are currently caused due to deficits in the host provider liability regime (hate speech, fake news, election

campaign bots & misinformation in social media and streaming platforms). Furthermore, we see a political-structural problem due to a significant fragmentation of responsibilities for those respective problems.

• Hardly any institution has a full overview of the entire picture and a responsibility for the entire damage

Structural shortcoming of the Telemedia Act (TMG) & E-Commerce Directive

• The TMG induces host providers to exercise minimal to no control on the content on their platforms

• Thus, the current anonymization of users, the lowest possible

knowledge of the host providers as well as the release from liability = diffusion of accountability

• These liability issues can also be considered “external effects” causing market failure and a need for internalization (putting it back to the market)

Main issue: How do we solve the problem of multiple diffusion of accountability on the net?

• Key Hypothesis: A high number of regulation problems on the internet

is mainly caused by a suboptimal balancing of anonymity and accountability on host provider platforms

44 Axel Voss

Member of the European Parliament

• There should not be an “either or” choice between anonymity and identification in the internet as these two represent the extreme end of a certain scale.

• Instead: There is a need for a flexible aggregate state pseudonymity • Criticism concerning the TMG regime and the EC directive: Instead one

sees a diffusion of responsibility, guaranteed anonymity option, liability privilege, disabled self-control by liability only in case of knowledge. • Thus, TMG and E-Commerce Directive actively induce a large part of

the liability issues created by the platforms

Solution: Balancing anonymity and accountability by using the algorithm A/B/C approach

• “Privacy is more important than ever in the digital age. At the same time, privacy must not be equated with anonymity. Personality, responsibility and liability for our own actions are also an elementary part of our legal culture.” (Thomas De Maizere)

• Balancing anonymity and accountability must be done considering certain aspects such as: Individual and collective risk of activities and the

separation of spaces into public, private and risk sensitive places on the internet.

• As most problems that are related to unregulated content are not caused by the internet itself, but - for the most part - by portals and platforms with commercial interests, there is a need for a new approach

A/B/C approach thus means that the “service” of host provider platforms: • A = Provision of an infrastructure / platform for content distribution (Provision of platform)

• B = Powerful anonymization of uploaders / customers (Anonymization)

• C = Extensive refusal of responsibility for user-generated content (Liability Exemption)

This means that the service of many host-provider platforms also lies in anonymization and the provision of diffusion of accountability

Regulative proposal within the A/B/C Approach

• Changes default setting from anonymity to verified pseudonymity

• Anonymity in public space internet will be possible, but it is not a default setting anymore

45

• It will always be possible to assign accountability (User -> platform -> server -> registrar -> payment service provider)

• Furthermore, platforms will have a higher motivation to efficiently self- regulate + higher motivation for users to self-regulate

46

Literatuurlijst

Europese Unie: Regelgeving

Handvest van de Grondrechten van de Europese Unie

Handvest van de grondrechten van de Europese Unie, 7 juni 2016, (PbEU 2016/C, 202/02)

Dataretentierichtlijn

RICHTLIJN 2006/24/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 15 maart 2006 betreffende de bewaring van gegevens die zijn gegenereerd of verwerkt in verband met het aanbieden van openbaar beschikbare elektronische communicatiediensten of van openbare communicatienetwerken en tot wijziging van Richtlijn 2002/58/EG.

Communicaties, Aanbevelingen en Rapporten Europese Unie

Aanbeveling 1/97/EC

Aanbeveling 1/97, ‘Wetgeving inzake gegevensbescherming en de media, Directoraat-

Generaal Interne Markt, 25 februari 1997

Aanbeveling 3/97/EC

Aanbeveling 3/97, ‘Anonimiteit op Internet’, Directoraat-Generaal Interne Markt, 3 december 1997.

47

Raad van Europa

Europees verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens

Verdrag tot bescherming van de rechten van de mens en de fundamentele vrijheden, Rome, 04-11-1950.

Recommendation CM/Rec(2003)

Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States, Declaration on freedom of communication of the internet with explanatory memorandum, 28 mei 2003, CM/Rec(2003).

Recommendation CM/Rec (2014)6

Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States, 'Guide to human rights for internet users’, 16 april 2014, Recommendation CM/Rec (2014)6.

Aanbeveling CM/Rec(2011)7

Aanbeveling van het Comité van Ministers van de Raad van Europa, On a new notion of media, 21 september 2011, Aanbeveling CM/Rec(2011)7.

Aanbeveling CM/Rec(2000)7

Aanbeveling van het Comité van Ministers van de Raad van Europa, On the right of journalists not to disclose their sources of information, 8 maart 2000, Aanbeveling CM/Rec(2000)7.

Verenigde Naties

Human Rights Council UN

Human Rights Council, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue,” 17 April 2013.

48

Rechtspraak

Hof van Justitie van de Europese Unie

HvJ EU 8 april 2014, C-239/12 en C-594/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:238 (Digital Rights Ireland) HvJ EU 21 december 2016, C-203/15 en C-698/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:970 ((Tele2 Sverige

AB)

HvJ EU 29 januari 2008 zaak C-275/06 (Productores de Música de España

(Promusicae)/Telefónica de España SAU).

Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens

EHRM 26 april 1979, nr 6538/74, (Sunday Times/Verenigd Koninkrijk) EHRM 25 maart 1985, nr. 8734/79, (Barthold/Bondsrepubliek Duitsland) EHRM 22 mei 1990, nr. 12726/87 (Autronic/Zwitserland)

EHRM 26 november 1991, nr 13585/88, (Observer and Guardian/Verenigd Koninkrijk) EHRM 27 maart 1996, nr. 17488/90, (Goodwin/Verenigd Koninkrijk)

EHRM 10 maart 2009, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0310JUD000300203 (Times Newspapers

LTD/Verenigd Koninkrijk)

EHRM 15 februari 2005, nr. 6841/09, (Steel and Morris/Verenigd Koninkrijk)

EHRM 14 april 2009, nr. 37374/05, (Társaság a Szabadságjogokér/Hongarije)

EHRM 18 december 2012, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1218JUD000311110 (Yildirim/Turkije) EHRM 13 juli 2012, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0113JUD001635406 (Mouvement Raëlien

Suisse/Zwitserland)

EHRM 10 oktober 2013, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1010JUD006456909 (Delfi AS/Estland) EHRM 17 februari 2015, nr. 6987/97, (Guseva/Bulgaria)

EHRM 15 oktober 2015, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1015JUD002751008 (Perínçek/Zwitserland). EHRM 16 juni 2015, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0616JUD006456909 (Delfi AS / Estland)

EHRM 16 november 2016, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1108JUD001803011, (Magyar Helsinki

Bizottság/Hongarije).

EHRM 3 oktober 2019, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1003JUD005522514, (Pastörs/Germany) EHRM 14 september 2019, nr. 38224/04, (Sanoma Uitgevers B.V./Nederland)

49

Hoge Raad

Hoge Raad 25 november 2011, ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AU4019 (Lycos/Pessers)

Overig

Macron, IGF 2018

IGF 2018 Speech by French President Emmanuel Macron,

https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2018-speech-by-french-president- emmanuel-macron, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Online/Kranten

Shontell Business Insider 2013

A. Shontell, ‘What It’s Like When Reddit Wrongly Accuses Your Loved One Of Murder’,

Business Insider, 26 juli 2013, https://www.businessinsider.com.au/reddit-falsely-accuses- sunil-tripathi-of-boston-bombing-2013-7, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Amnesty 2018

Amnesty International, ‘Persvrijheid ligt onder vuur, óók in de EU’, 3 mei 2018,

https://www.amnesty.nl/actueel/persvrijheid-ligt-onder-vuur, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Outeren, NRC 2019

E. van Outeren, ‘Zo knevel je de kritische pers in Midden-Europa’, NRC, 30 april 2019, https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/04/30/zo-knevel-je-de-kritische-pers-in-midden-europa- a3958528, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

50 Anderson, Politico EU 2019

E. Anderson, ‘Manfred Weber backs blocking fake names on social media’, Politico EU, 16 mei 2019, https://www.politico.eu/article/weber-timmermans-europe-social-media/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Klei, Elsevier 2016

E. Klei, ‘Aan het Volk van Nederland: na ruim 200 jaar nog steeds actueel’, Elsevier, 7 juni 2016, https://www.elsevierweekblad.nl/nederland/achtergrond/2016/06/aan-het-volk-van- nederland-na-ruim-200-jaar-nog-steeds-actueel-314144/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Garside, The Guardian 2018

J. Garside, ‘Malta car bomb kills Panama Papers journalist’, The Guardian, 16 oktober 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/16/malta-car-bomb-kills-panama-papers- journalist, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Wong, The Guardian 2019

Julia Carrie Wong, ´8chan: the far-right website linked to the rise in hate crimes – three attackers in six months allegedly posted their plans on the site in advance. Why is it allowed to operate openly?’, The Guardian, 5 augustus 2019,

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/aug/04/mass-shootings-el-paso-texas-dayton- ohio-8chan-far-right-website, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

K9im, Korea IT Times 2015

K. Jee-hyung Kim, ‘Lessons learned from South Korea’s Real-Name Policy’, Korea IT Times, 15 januari 2015, http://www.koreaittimes.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=19361, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Kayali, Politico EU 2019

L. Kayali, ‘Austria’s bid to end online anonymity triggers crackdown fears’, 6 februari 2019, https://www.politico.eu/article/austrian-conservatives-want-to-end-online-anonymity-and- journalists-are-worried/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

51 Yousef, Der Standard 2019

M. Al-Yousef, ‘Government seeks to Eliminate Internet Anonymity – With Severe Penalties’,

DerStandard, 18 april 2019. https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000101677286/government- seeks-to-eliminate-internet-anonymity-with-severe-penalties, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Germanova, New York Times 202

M. Germanova, ‘Slovak journalist found shot to death at home’, New York Times, 26 februari 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/26/world/europe/jan-kuciak-slovakia-journalist- killed.html, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Ingram, Gigaom 2013

M. Ingram, ´Lessons in the crowdsourced verification of news from Storyful and Reddit’s Syria forum´, Gigaom, 17 december 2013, https://gigaom.com/2013/12/17/lessons-in-the- crowdsourced-verification-of-news-from-storyful-and-reddits-syria-forum/, laatst

geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2019.

Moody, Politici EU 2019

O. Moody, ‘Austrians to lose anonymity online under anti-abuse law’, The Times, 25 april 2019, https://www.politico.eu/article/austrian-conservatives-want-to-end-online-anonymity- and-journalists-are-worried/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Nieber, NRC 2016

L. Nieber, ‘Vaarwel Twitter. Ik laat het riool aan de ratten’, NRC, 5 september 2019, https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2016/09/05/vaarwel-twitterik-laat-het-riool-aan-de-ratten- 4059841-a1519772, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Trachtenberg Alpert, Wall Street Journal 2020.

Zie J. A. Trachtenberg en L. I. Alpert, ‘Bari Weiss Quits New York Times Opinion, Alleging Hostile Work environment’, https://www.wsj.com/articles/bari-weiss-quits-new-york-times- opinion-alleging-hostile-work-environment-11594762712, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

52 Kempenaar, NPO Radio 1 2020

W. Kempenaar, ‘Marianne Zwagerman: Cancel Culture kostte me 60.000 euro’, nporadio1, 10 juli 2020, https://www.nporadio1.nl/binnenland/25102-de-cancel-culture-kostte-marianne- zwagerman-60-000-euro, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Zeven, Quote 2020

M. Zeven, ‘Adverteerders rennen massaal weg bij VI na opmerkingen Johan Derksen, Quote, 19 juni 2020, https://www.quotenet.nl/entertainment/media/a32912607/adverteerders-rennen- massaal-weg-bij-vi-na-opmerkingen-johan-derksen/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Hara, de Volkskrant 2019

H. Bahara, ‘Feministe Mona Eltahawy komt niet meer naar de Balie vanwege discussie over ‘deportatie van moslims’, de Volkskrant, 22 april 2019, https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws- achtergrond/feministe-mona-eltahawy-komt-niet-naar-de-balie-vanwege-discussie-over- deportatie-van-moslims~bea79492/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Potok, Southern Poverty Law Center 2015

M. Potok, ‘The year in hate and extremism’, Southern Poverty Law Center, 10 maart 2015, https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2015/year-hate-and-extremism-0, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Bouma, De Volkskrant 2019

K. Bouma, ‘8chan: de plek waar alles – hoe verwerpelijk en extremistisch ook – bespreekbaar is, De Volkskrant, 5 augustus 2019, https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/8chan-de- plek-waar-alles-hoe-verwerpelijk-en-extremistisch-ook-bespreekbaar-is~bf978cda/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

53 Pesce, Marketwatch 2020

N. Pesce, ‘Reddit bans ‘The_Donald’ and ‘ChapoTrapHouse’ among 2,000 online communities in huge purge’, Marketwatch, 29 juni 2020,

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/reddit-bans-thedonald-and-chapotraphouse-among-2000- online-communities-in-huge-purge-2020-06-29, geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Reddit 2019

Reddit, /r/syriancivilwar, ‘The Week in Review – Aleppo in review’ 19 januari 2019,

https://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/5mnf4c/the_week_in_review_aleppo_in_r eview/, geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

Ingram, Gigaom 2019

M. Ingram, ´Lessons in the crowdsourced verification of news from Storyful and Reddit’s Syria forum´, Gigaom, 17 december 2013, https://gigaom.com/2013/12/17/lessons-in-the-crowdsourced-verification-of- news-from-storyful-and-reddits-syria-forum/, laatst geraadpleegd op 24 juli 2020.

54 Artikelen

Broersma & Graham, Journalism Practice

M. Broersma & T. Graham 2012. ‘‘Social Media As Beat: Tweets As News Source during the 2010 British and Dutch Elections.’’ Journalism Practice 6 (3): 403419

Goode, New media & society

L, Goode. "Social news, citizen journalism and democracy." New media & society 11.8 (2009).

Knutilla, First monday

L. Knuttila, "User unknown: 4chan, anonymity and contingency." First Monday (2011).

Lee & Ho, Journal of Global Information Management

Lee, Ho, et al. "Impact of anonymity on information sharing through internal psychological processes: A case of south korean online communities." Journal of Global Information

Management (JGIM) 22.3 (2014).

Gorwa, Information, Communications & Society

R. Gorwa, "What is platform governance?." Information, Communication & Society 22.6 (2019).

Bruns & Burgess, Journalism Studies

In document Een verbod op platformanonimiteit in de Europese Unie (pagina 40-60)