Verfassungsrecht für digitale Technologien, KI-Governance, Plattformregulierung, digitale Rechte und verfassungsrechtliche Aspekte des technologischen Wandels. Umfasst digitale Grundrechte, Datenschutz als Verfassungsrecht und verfassungsrechtliche Regulierung neuer Technologien.
In diesem Dezember jährt sich die Gründung des Europäischen Gerichtshofes zum 70. Mal. Der EuGH zelebriert diesen runden Geburtstag bereits mit dem Hashtag #CJEUin70days auf dem sozialen Netzwerk Twitter. Nicht nur diese Kampagne, sondern auch die Öffentlichkeitsarbeit des EuGHs über soziale Medien insgesamt scheint dabei nicht im Einklang zu stehen mit der eigenen Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs.
The U.S. Supreme Court decision of 24 June 2022 overruled a half century of precedent supporting a constitutional right to abortion across the U.S. established in 1973 in Roe v. Wade. Essentially, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization left the decision on abortion to individual states. The ruling, although astonishing, was not necessarily a surprise, after its draft had leaked a few weeks earlier. But to the surprise of many, almost immediately, Facebook and Instagram started removing posts informing about access to abortion pills, the Associated Press and Vice first reported.
On 21 June Meta and the US Department for Housing and Urban Development released a legal settlement that will restrict Meta’s ability to offer those clients some of its core ad-targeting products. It resolves (for now) a long-running case over discriminatory targeting of housing adverts. Meta is now prohibited from using certain targeting tools in this context, and has promised new tools to ensure more representative targeting. This US lawsuit should be a wake-up call for European regulators, reminding them that taking systemic discrimination seriously requires proactive regulatory reform and enforcement. The relevant provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA) are largely symbolic.
Vor rund zwei Wochen hat die Kommission ihren Entwurf für eine Verordnung zur Bekämpfung des sexuellen Missbrauchs von Kindern vorgestellt. Die damit verbundene Einführung der Überprüfung sämtlicher digital verschickter Inhalte dürfte das größte staatliche Überwachungsvorhaben in Europa seit dem Ende des Kalten Krieges sein und verstößt offenkundig gegen die Grundrechte-Charta.
Nigeria's transition to a digital economy is in full swing. As terrorism and violent extremism are ravaging certain parts of the country, the mounting insecurity has necessitated huge budgetary allocations to national security, giving way to a new kind of digital authoritarianism. Serious concerns have been raised regarding the misuse of collected data and arbitrary surveillance, which undermine human rights and civic freedoms.
The recent CJEU Case C-319/20, Meta Platforms Ireland provides insights on the interpretation of Article 80(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (GDPR), which regulates representative actions in the data protection field. The Court of Justice specified that actions protecting general interests fall under the scope of Article 80(2) GDPR, but leaves the task unmoved to reconcile this provision with the Directive on Representative Actions (DRA).
In Kenya, typical moments during which citizens' rights are limited have followed emergencies, such as terrorist attacks or the COVID-19 pandemic. It is much easier to implement personally invasive policies such as biometric identification under urgency and addressing only a section of the public. A recent incident involving motorcycle taxis in Kenya, popularly known as boda bodas, illustrates this.
On 26 April 2022 the CJEU delivered its much-awaited judgement in Case C-401/19 – Poland v. Parliament and Council. The case concerns the validity of Article 17 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive in light of fundamental rights. The judgment marks the climax of a turbulent journey in the area of copyright law, with potential implications for the future of platform regulation and content moderation in EU law.
The ongoing war in Ukraine sheds light on crucial challenges of our digital media landscape. The social media-driven “(mis)information wars” surrounding the Russian invasion expose a growing epistemic divide running through liberal democracies. The regulatory focus on truth, with measures like fact-checking, serves little to cure the larger problems behind this. We should rather use the power of the law to devise new modes of intelligent speech regulation mimicking the functions formerly played by the centralized set-up of communication conditions.
Mit seinem Urteil über die grundrechtliche Bewertung des umstrittenen Artikel 17 der EU-Urheberrechtsrichtlinie (Rechtssache C-401/19) definiert der Europäische Gerichtshof enge Schranken für den Einsatz von Filtersystemen zur automatischen Sperrung mutmaßlich illegaler Inhalte. Das Urteil ist weit über das Urheberrecht hinaus von Bedeutung, da es den Sinngehalt des Verbots allgemeiner Überwachungspflichten präzisiert. Dieses Verbot ist auch Gegenstand einer aktuellen gerichtlichen Auseinandersetzung zwischen Grünen-Politikerin Renate Künast und dem Meta-Konzern über die Frage, inwieweit Facebook dafür verantwortlich ist, gegen Falschzitate auf der Plattform vorzugehen.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters