Facebook, Twitter do not need anti-piracy filtering, says court

Social networks do not have to install specific anti-piracy filtering systems, the European Court of Justice has said today in a key ruling.

A case brought by SABAM, a Belgian music royalty collection firm, against Netlog went to Europe's top court to decide the legality of imposing a filtering system on social networks.

SABAM wanted the ECJ to say that Netlog and other social networks such as Facebook and Twitter had a duty to actively monitor music and videos posted by users to ensure that no material infringed copyright.



However, the court said that a requirement on Netlog to filter posts would have contravened current e-commerce rules, and also breached the rights to freedom of information.

SABAM claimed that Netlog, which has 95 million members across Europe, must stop allowing unlawful content being shared on its website, or face a 1,000-euro (£828) fine for every day that it failed to comply with the order.

It effectively wanted the social networks to proactively filter content on the site and indiscriminately monitor the activity of its users, something which the ECJ said was in breach of the EU's E-Commerce Directive.

In its judgement, the ECJ ruled that imposing a filtering system would be a "serious infringement" of Netlog's freedom to operate as a business, largely because it would require the firm to "install a complicated, costly, permanent computer system at its own expense".

The ECJ also noted that such a system would pose risks to the protection of personal data, as it would require "the identification, systematic analysis and processing of information connected with the profiles created on the social network".

There could be additional costs to the freedom to send and receive information as any Netlog filtering system "might not distinguish adequately between unlawful content and lawful content, with the result that its introduction could lead to the blocking of lawful communications".

The ruling, which comes amid fierce debate over the new anti-piracy measures in the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta), appears to suggest that social networks will not be ordered to introduce costly infringement filtering systems.

Michael Gardner, head of the intellectual property practice at law firm Wedlake Bell, told BBC News: "The European Court appears to have ruled out the idea that operators of social network sites and ISPs can be forced - at their own expense - to impose blanket monitoring and filtering aimed at stopping infringements."

But he added: "The ruling doesn't stop rights owners seeking more limited injunctions against social networking sites or ISPs, but they will have to be more 'proportionate' in scope and effect."

The Open Rights Group, an opponent of Acta, said in a statement: "It's good to see courts promoting our rights by swatting away plans to snoop on people's use of social networks.

"It is especially timely because, as seen in agreements like Acta, policymakers everywhere find it much harder to respect our rights when making intellectual property policy."

The ECJ's ruling comes amid a worldwide crackdown on websites accused of piracy, including the high-profile closure of the Megaupload website last month by US authorities.

This week, music website RnBXclusive.com was shut down by the UK's Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) over claims that it facilitated illegal filesharing that cost the music industry £15m a year.

> 'Rogue' eBook websites shut down by US publishers