EU’s Digital Services Act could censor the entire world

Legal advocacy group ADF International has published an open letter calling for a rethink of the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA).

The proposed bill has been severely criticised for the threat it poses to free speech online, not only inside the EU, but even the world over.

In its open letter, ADF argued that the DSA goes far beyond coping with legitimate concerns about child exploitation and terrorist related material. Instead, the bill represents a “race to the underside” as a consequence of the undeniable fact that online content could be deemed “illegal” if it contravened not only EU law, however the law of any member state.

Effectively whichever EU member state had essentially the most restrictive laws would set the template for the entire bloc.

Furthermore, legal precedent suggests that such restrictions could in truth find yourself being enforced globally, ADF suggested.

“The DSA introduces sweeping mechanisms that empower each institutions and personal actors to flag content they consider to be ‘illegal—a term broadly defined as any content not compliant with EU or national laws. This creates a situation through which speech lawful on the time of publication could possibly be retroactively flagged and penalised under shifting legal standards across 27 member states,” the letter reads.

“Let us be clear: there’s a broad consensus that certain types of expression—corresponding to child exploitation or incitement to terrorism—should be prohibited. However, the DSA goes far beyond these narrow and universally agreed limits.

“Instead, it constructs a pan-European censorship infrastructure with loosely defined boundaries and the potential to suppress legitimate democratic discourse.”

The US House Judiciary Committee has previously said in a letter to European Commissioner Henna Virkkunen: “Though nominally applicable to only EU speech, the DSA, as written, may limit or restrict Americans’ constitutionally protected speech within the United States.

“Companies that censor an insufficient amount of ‘misleading or deceptive’ speech—as defined by EU bureaucrats—face fines as much as six percent of worldwide revenue, which might amount to billions of dollars for a lot of American firms.

“Furthermore, because many social media platforms generally maintain one set of content moderation policies that they apply globally, restrictive censorship laws just like the DSA may set de facto global censorship standards.”

ADF called upon the EU to interact in consultation with experts in freedom of expression, constitutional law and digital rights and to look at whether the DSA could be compatible with fundamental human rights. Additionally the group called upon the EU to reveal which NGOs and other groups were involved in reviewing the DSA.

The open letter, which has been signed by over 2,000 people, concluded, “The European Union has long prided itself on being a beacon of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. But rights safeguarded in charters and treaties must even be protected in regulation and practice.

“Only through an honest and demanding assessment can the EU be sure that its digital policies remain aligned with the very human rights principles it seeks to defend.”