TY - JOUR
T1 - Grading AG Szpunar’s opinion in case C-18/18 – A caution against worldwide content blocking as default
AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B
N1 - License Agreement: Further use of Work (https://journals.muni.cz/mujlt/about/editorialPolicies#custom-4)
You hereby agree that You shall further use the Work after its publication in MUJLT as follows:
c) publisher’s version (i.e. post-print with final typesetting, formatting and corrections) for non-commercial purposes (i.e. not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation):
-on non-commercial academic repositories,
provided that:
i) it is not modified or adapted in any way,
ii) third parties are not granted any rights to use the publisher’s version,
iii) the reputation of MU and/or MUJLT is not negatively affected by such use;
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - On 4th of June 2019, Advocate General Szpunar delivered his Opinion in Case C-18/18 between Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek (an Austrian politician) and Facebook Ireland Limited. The politician had sought to have certain current and future content – argued to be defamatory – blocked by Facebook with worldwide effect. This is arguably the most important Internet speech-related case currently before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and will doubtlessly influence court reasoning far beyond Europe.This Comment analyses AG Szpunar’s interesting, but problematic, Opinion with particular emphasis on his reasoning in relation to the question of scope of jurisdiction; that is, what is the appropriate geographical scope of orders in these circumstances, rendered by a court that has personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.
AB - On 4th of June 2019, Advocate General Szpunar delivered his Opinion in Case C-18/18 between Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek (an Austrian politician) and Facebook Ireland Limited. The politician had sought to have certain current and future content – argued to be defamatory – blocked by Facebook with worldwide effect. This is arguably the most important Internet speech-related case currently before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and will doubtlessly influence court reasoning far beyond Europe.This Comment analyses AG Szpunar’s interesting, but problematic, Opinion with particular emphasis on his reasoning in relation to the question of scope of jurisdiction; that is, what is the appropriate geographical scope of orders in these circumstances, rendered by a court that has personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073539419&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5817/MUJLT2019-2-10
DO - 10.5817/MUJLT2019-2-10
M3 - Article
SN - 1802-5943
VL - 13
SP - 389
EP - 400
JO - Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology
JF - Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology
IS - 2
ER -