Erhvervs-, Vækst- og Eksportudvalget 2017-18
ERU Alm.del Bilag 284
Offentligt
1924644_0001.png
Public consultation on measures to further improve the
effectiveness of the fight against illegal content online
Fields marked with * are mandatory.
Introduction
The availability and proliferation of illegal content online remains an important public policy and security
concern in the EU, notably with regards to the dissemination of terrorist content, as well as of illegal hate
speech, child sexual abuse material, or illegal commercial practices and infringements of intellectual
property rights, selling of illicit drugs, counterfeits or other illicit goods.
The Commission adopted on 28 September 2017 a
Communication
with guidance on the responsibilities
of online service providers in respect of illegal content online and a
Recommendation
on measures to
effectively tackle illegal content online on1 March 2018.
The Commission is collecting evidence on the effectiveness of measures and the scale of the problem,
and will explore, by the end of 2018, further measures to improve the effectiveness of combating illegal
content online.
In particular, through the present public consultation the Commission seeks to gather views from all
relevant stakeholders. The questionnaire is targeted to the general public, hosting service providers such
as online platforms, organisations reporting the presence of illegal content online, competent authorities
and law enforcement bodies, and academia, civil societies and other organisations.
About you
*
Please indicate the capacity in which you are replying to this public consultation. Please note that the option you
select will personalise the subsequent questions.
at most 1 choice(s)
a) as an individual, in my personal capacity
b) representing an online hosting service provider
c) representing a business associations replying on behalf of online hosting providers
d) representing a non-for-profit organisation identifying and reporting allegedly illegal content online
e) representing a for-profit organisation identifying and reporting allegedly illegal content online
f) representing a competent authority, including law enforcement authorities, internet referral unit,
ministries or consumer protection authorities
g) representing an organisation or business representing victims
h) representing civil society organisation representing civil rights interests
i) representing other industry association
j) representing a research or academic organisation
k) other
Other
1
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0002.png
50 character(s) minimum
Section for the general public
Replying to this questionnaire should take an estimate of 10-15 minutes.
Section for online hosting service providers
Section for organisations reporting the presence of illegal content
Section for national authorities and law enforcement authorities
Section for other organisations, civil society, academia or other businesses
and associations
Replying to the questionnaire is estimated to take 20 to 30 minutes and may require documenting
answers with specific data.
General information about your organisation
*
Name of the organisation
50 character(s) maximum
If your organisation is included in the Transparency Register, please indicate your ID number.
If your organisation is not registered, we invite you to register
here
, although it is not compulsory to be registered to reply to this consultation.
Why a transparency register?
40 character(s) maximum
*
Should the European Commission need further details in relation to your answers, would you agree to be
contacted by the Commission?
Yes
*
Email address:
No
*
In what country does your organisation have its headquarters?
2
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0003.png
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Andorra
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Côte D'Ivoire
Cabo Verde
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Democratic Republic of the Congo
3
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0004.png
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
4
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0005.png
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Micronesia
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Republic of Moldova
5
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0006.png
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Korea
South Sudan
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Timor-Leste
Togo
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
6
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0007.png
United States of America
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Venezuela
Viet Nam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
*
Is your organisation established in a/several EU Member State(s)?
a) Yes
b) No
*
Which one(s)?
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
*
What online hosting services does your company offer?
7
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0008.png
a) E-commerce market place
b) Collaborative economy
c) Social networking
d) Video, audio and image sharing
e) File sharing
f) News and media
g) App distribution
h) Rating and reviews
i) Video streaming
j) Other online hosting services (please specify)
If j) Other online hosting services, please specify
*
Please briefly describe your organisation and/or provide a public URL.
500 character(s) maximum
The European Commission uses the following parameters to differentiate types of companies in terms of
size. (
EU recommendation 2003/361
)
*
Following this definition, your company is:
a) A micro-enterprise
b) A small enterprise
c) A medium-sized enterprise
d) Other
Approximately, how many users of the online hosting service does your company have (please refer to the past
12 months)?
8
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0009.png
a) registered users (all types of users included)
50 character(s) maximum
b) users in the EU
50 character(s) maximum
c) registered business users (if relevant)
50 character(s) maximum
d) other metric, as appropriate (e.g. visits per month, total downloads)
50 character(s) maximum
*
What type of activity is the main area of competence of your institution?
a) Law enforcement authority investigating criminal activities
b) Internet Referral Unit
c) National government
d) Regional government
e) Consumer protection authority
f) Other
If other, please specify
200 character(s) maximum
Please indicate if you are a user of the following types of online hosting services.
a) E-commerce market place
b) Collaborative economy
c) Social networking
d) Video or audio streaming
e) File sharing
f) News and media
g) App distribution
h) Rating and reviews
g) Other
9
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0010.png
Please specify
100 character(s) maximum
General information about you
Firstname
Lastname
*
Country of residence
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Andorra
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Côte D'Ivoire
10
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0011.png
Cabo Verde
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
11
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0012.png
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Micronesia
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
12
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0013.png
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Republic of Moldova
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Korea
South Sudan
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
13
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0014.png
Syrian Arab Republic
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Timor-Leste
Togo
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States of America
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Venezuela
Viet Nam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
*
Your age range
<18
18-30
31-50
51-70
70+
How often do you use the following types of services?
A
few
Daily
times
per
week
I shop on e-commerce market places (e.g.
Amazon, Etsy)
I use collaborative economy platforms (e.g.
Airbnb, Uber)
A
few
times
per
month
A
few
times
per
year
Not
at
all
I
don't
know
14
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0015.png
I read blogs online (e.g. WordPress
powered blogs)
I use social networks (e.g. Facebook,
Twitter)
I watch video, live-streaming or I listen to
audio files on platforms like e.g. YouTube,
Vimeo, SoundCloud)
I upload or download documents, videos,
images or music on file sharing services (e.g.
Dropbox, WeTransfer)
I browse or download apps from app stores
(e.g. Google Play, Apple App Store)
I read or write reviews and give ratings to
products or services on rating platforms (e.g.
Yelp, TripAdvisor)
I read or write comments on articles on
online news websites
Have you been a victim of one of the following illegal activities?
a) Terrorism or terrorist content online
b) Child sexual abuse
c) Illegal hate speech
d) Copyright infringement
e) Infringement of other Intellectual Property Rights
f) Illegal Commercial Practices (e.g. scams, frauds and subscription traps)
g) Yes, other type of illegal activity than those listed above
h) No, none of the above
i) I don’t know
If g) other type of illegal activity, please specify
100 character(s) maximum
Please share in what way this has affected you (e.g. effect of the availability of the content online, effect on your
community, loss of revenue etc.).
1000 character(s) maximum
Your experience: encountering illegal content online
15
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0016.png
While using the services mentioned here-above, did you come across the following types of content?
More
than
5
times
I
don't
know
Between
Never
Once
2 and 5
times
Child sexual abuse material
Terrorist content
Pirated content (e.g. music, films, books) or other
audiovisual content
Counterfeit goods (e.g. fake perfume, fake designer
brands) or other types of intellectual property
infringements
Illegal hate speech (public incitement to violence or
hatred directed against a group of persons or a
member of such a group defined on the basis of
race, colour, descent, religion or belief, or national or
ethnic origin)
Scams, frauds, subscription traps or other illegal
commercial practices)
Content I deemed illegal for other reasons than the
above.
If you have encountered content you deemed illegal for other reasons than the above, please specify
300 character(s) maximum
What action did you take after encountering the content referred to above? (Multiple options possible, should you
have encountered different situations on different occasions.)
a) No action
b) I informed the platform hosting the content
c) I contacted directly the person/organisation who had uploaded the content
d) I alerted the police/relevant enforcement authorities
e) Other action
If other, please specify
50 character(s) maximum
16
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0017.png
Did you receive further information from the hosting service provider on what they intended to do as a follow-up of
your notification?
a) No
b) Yes, general information on the process
c) Yes, information about the final decision on taking the content down or keeping it online
d) Other
Other comments - please specify
What happened to the content you had reported? (Multiple options possible)
a) It was taken-down
b) It was kept online
c) I do not know
d) Other
If other, please specify
300 character(s) maximum
How fast was the content taken down?
a)Within minutes
b) Within hours
c) Within days
d) Within a longer period of time
e) I do not know
To what extent do you agree with the following statements in relation to your notifications sent to platforms to alert
them of potentially illegal content?
Strongly
agree
It was clear to me that the
content I was viewing was illegal.
It was clear to me that the
content I was viewing was violating
the community standards or the
terms of service of the hosting
service.
It was easy to report the content.
Overall, I am satisfied with how
the company handled my
notification.
Strongly
disagree
I
don't
know
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
17
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0018.png
If your answers to the previous questions refer to multiple experiences with reporting content, please explain if
there were substantial differences in particular occasions, relating to specific types of content or in your interactions
with different platforms.
500 character(s) maximum
How were you affected by the illegal activities you pointed to in the previous answers?
500 character(s) maximum
Your experience: removal of content online
*
Have you tried to upload or post online content which was blocked or removed by a hosting service provider?
a) No, never
b) Yes, once
c) Yes, several times
d) I don't know
On what grounds was your content blocked or removed? (multiple answers possible)
a) Incitement to terrorism
b) Child sexual abuse
c) Illegal hate speech
d) Copyright infringement
e) Infringement of other intellectual property rights (e.g. counterfeit, design infringements)
f) Illegal commercial practice (e.g. scam, fraud, subscription trap)
g) Infringement to other community standards or terms of service
h) I was not informed
i) Other
If i) Other, please specify
50 character(s) maximum
Have you taken any action?
18
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0019.png
a) I contacted the hosting service and argued that the content was not illegal or against community
standards or terms of service
b) I uploaded the content again on the same or a different hosting service
c) I did not react
d) Other action
If d) Other action, please specify
300 character(s) maximum
What was the follow-up on the dispute? (multiple answers possible)
a) The dispute was handled only at the level of the hosting service
b) The dispute escalated to trial in court
c) The dispute escalated to an out-of-court dispute settlement body
d) Other
If d) Other, please specify
300 character(s) maximum
What was the final decision concerning the content? (Multiple options possible)
a) Dispute is still ongoing
b) The hosting service reinstated the content
c) The content was not reinstated
d) I do not know
Have you incurred sanctions for repeated infringements, in addition to the specific content being removed
/blocked?
a) No
b) Yes, my account was suspended
c) Yes, my account was terminated
d) Yes, other sanctions
e) I do not know
If d) ther sanctions - please specify
Please explain how the take-down or blocking of your content and potential follow-up actions have affected you.
1000 character(s) maximum
19
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0020.png
To what extent do you agree with the following statements in relation to the process of removing of your allegedly
illegal content and follow-up actions?
Strongly
agree
It was clear to me from the terms
of service or community standards
of the platform that the content I
uploaded was not accepted on the
hosting service.
Overall, I find the process for
removing content sufficiently
transparent.
I disagree that my content should
be banned by the community
standards or terms of service.
I was able to contest the removal
decision.
It was clear what dispute
settlement mechanisms or external
bodies I could use to escalate the
dispute.
After repeated removals of my
content, I was informed clearly
about the sanctions which would
be taken against me.
Overall, I find the process for
disputing content removal
decisions sufficiently transparent.
Strongly
disagree
I
don't
know
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Illegal content online
What type(s) of illegal content is your organisation mostly concerned with?
a) Terrorist content
b) Child sexual abuse materials
c) Illegal hate speech
d) Copyright infringement
e) Infringement of other intellectual property rights (e.g. counterfeit, design rights infringement)
f) Illegal commercial practice
g) Other
20
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0021.png
If other, please specify
50 character(s) maximum
How do the online illegal activities affect the victims you are representing? (e.g. emotional damage, negative
effect to the community, loss of revenue, etc.)
Does your organisation identify and refer/notify illegal content to content hosting providers?
a) Yes
b) No
On what basis do you refer content to hosting service providers?
a) National law
b) EU law
c) Hosting service providers' terms of service or community guidelines
d) Other
Please specify.
400 character(s) maximum
Please specify if there are other mechanisms you can use on a case-by-case basis to flag illegal content to
hosting service providers
21
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0022.png
Please select in the list below the systems you use for detecting, removing, or blocking each of the following types
of illegal content.
Content
infringing
Terrorist
content
Illegal
hate
speech
Child
sexual
abuse
Copyright
infringing
content
other IPR
(e.g.
counterfeit,
design
rights)
Content
moderation
by staff
Content
moderation
by third
party
services
contracted
Automated
filters for
blocking
content
Proactive
automated
detection
tools
Notices
received
from users
Illegal
commercial
practices
Other
22
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0023.png
Notices
received
from
competent
authorities
or law
enforcement
bodies
Notices
received
from trusted
organisations
Other
23
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0024.png
Please explain your online content policy and how the different systems are used for the detection, removal,
blocking or reinstating content.
1500 character(s) maximum
24
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0025.png
Please select in the list below the systems you use for detecting each of the following types of illegal content, if
applicable.
Content
infringing
Terrorist
content
Illegal
hate
speech
Child
sexual
abuse
Copyright
infringing
content
other IPR (e.
g.
counterfeit,
design
rights)
Content
monitored
and
reported by
staff
Automated
detection
tools
Content
flagged by
third parties
Other
Illegal
commercial
practices
Other
25
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0026.png
If other, please specify
200 character(s) maximum
For each of the systems you use, please explain how accurate they are. Please share measurements for specific
accuracy indicators where available, in particular when automated tools are used (e.g. shares of true/false
positives, shares of true/false negatives), per type of illegal content.
1500 character(s) maximum
26
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0027.png
What is the median speed of removal for the following types of illegal content?
Content infringing other
Terrorist content
From the point when the
content becomes publicly
available to users (e.g. it is
uploaded, or posted
online)?
From the time the content
is flagged to your service (e.
g. by users, referrals)?
From the time your own
content moderation
systems first identify the
content?
Illegal hate speech
Child sexual abuse material
Copyright infringing content
IPR (e.g. counterfeit,
design rights)
Illegal Commercial practice
Other
27
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0028.png
For what share of the content removed have you received counter-notices from content providers contesting the
removal decision (in the past 12 months, per type of illegal content)? What share of the counter-notices led to
reinstating the content?
500 character(s) maximum
28
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0029.png
Can you quantify the costs supported by your organisation for each type of system (e.g. absolute numbers per
year, or as a fraction of operating expenditure of the relevant business unit(s) per year)?
Estimated costs for initial set-up
Content moderation by staff
Content moderation by third party services contracted
Automated filters for re-upload
Proactive automated detection tools
Notices received from users (including through online comments)
Notices received from competent authorities or law enforcement bodies
Notices received from other trusted organisations
Other
Estimated cost for use and maintenance
29
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0030.png
Can you quantify the costs supported by your organisation for each type of system used for detecting and flagging
illegal content online (e.g. absolute numbers per year, or as a fraction of operating expenditure of the relevant
business unit(s) per year)?
Estimated costs for initial set-up
Content monitored and reported by staff
Automated detection tools
Content flagged by third parties
Other
Estimated cost for use and maintenance
30
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0031.png
To your knowledge, what share of the content you report to hosting service providers (per year) is taken down?
What is the median timeframe from your notification to take-down?
Share of the content reported which is removed by online hosting service
providers
Terrorist content
Illegal hate speech
Child sexual abuse material
Copyright infringing content
Infringement of other intellectual property rights (e.g. counterfeit, design
rights infringements)
Illegal commercial practices
Other
Median timeframe from notification to take-down
31
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0032.png
Do you publish a report with aggregated data on the content proactively identified, notified, taken-down, blocked
and/or counter-notices received?
a) Yes
b) No
Please insert a hyperlink to the most recent report
Do you cooperate with third-party organisations with a privileged status for flagging illegal content on your platform
(e.g. trusted flagger status)?
a) Yes, civil society
b) Yes, public bodies
c) Yes, private entities (e.g. rights holders)
d) No
What types of illegal content can such organisations flag?
a) Terrorism content
b) Hate speech
c) Child sexual abuse
d) Copyright infringements
e) Oher intellectual property rights infringements
f) Illegal commercial practices (e.g. scam, fraud, subscription trap)
g) Other
If g) Other, please specify
Is your organisation labelled as a 'trusted flagger' (or equivalent) with privileged status given by a/several hosting
service providers?
Yes
No
What criteria were applied to decide your organisation's privileged status?
500 character(s) maximum
What criteria do you apply to decide which organisations gain a privileged status?
32
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0033.png
500 character(s) maximum
Under what conditions and how can the privileged status be revoked?
500 character(s) maximum
What tools do you use to prevent users from repeatedly uploading illegal content of the same nature?
1000 character(s) maximum
Is there a dedicated entity within your organisation/Member State for flagging illegal content online to hosting
service providers (e.g. Internet Referral Unit)?
a) Yes
b) No
Please explain which entity and what mandate it fulfils and the advantages and challenges the organisation is
facing.
500 character(s) maximum
Please explain if there are any other mechanisms you can use on a case-by-case basis to flag illegal content to
hosting service providers. How do such mechanism function and what is the legal basis they are supported by?
500 character(s) maximum
Please describe the challenges, obstacles and risks you are facing in tackling illegal content.
1000 character(s) maximum
33
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0034.png
Further measures for detecting, removing and preventing reappearance of illegal
content
What features of notice systems and further measures do you consider to be most effective for enabling hosting
service providers to make diligent decisions on the content notified? Please score the features on a scale from 1
(very effective) to 5 (not effective).
I
1
Standardised, accessible and user-friendly online interface
for reporting content
Identification of content with unique identifiers (e.g. URLs)
Possibility to file multiple notices
Explanation of reasons and grounds of illegality
Allowing for anonymous notices
Standardised, binding notice and action procedures
Other
Please specify
2
3
4
5
don't
know
500 character(s) maximum
Please score the effectiveness of the following measures to support the cooperation between platforms and
competent authorities/law enforcement bodies. Please use a scale from 1 (very effective) to 5 (not effective).
I
1
Enhanced cooperation and exchanges between hosting
service providers and competent authorities
Enhanced capabilities and training for national authorities
and courts
Appointment of points of contact amongst hosting service
providers within EU Member States for cooperation with
competent authorities
2
3
4
5
don't
know
34
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0035.png
Appointment of points of contact amongst law enforcement
or other competent authorities for cooperating with hosting
service providers
Technical interfaces between platforms and law enforcement
or other competent authorities
Obligation to report illegal content to competent authorities
for analysis and investigation
Setting time-limits to processing referrals and notifications
from law enforcement or other competent authorities (such as
internet referral units)
Other
Please specify
What further mechanisms would best support the cooperation between hosting services and trusted flaggers?
Please score the mechanisms below on a scale from 1 (very effective) to 5 (not effective).
I
1
2
3
4
5
don't
know
Agreement between the platform and the trusted flaggers
Trusted status agreed by a group of platforms
Certification of the trusted flaggers by national authorities
Certification of trusted flaggers at EU level
Possibility to submit data feeding the hosting service
provider's automated moderation tools
Financial support to trusted flaggers by public authorities
Financial support to trusted flaggers by private entities on a
voluntary basis
Setting time-limits to processing referrals and notifications
from trusted flaggers
Other
If other, please specify
300 character(s) maximum
35
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0036.png
What criteria should organisations fulfil to gain a privileged status ('trusted flaggers') when reporting content for
removal?
1000 character(s) maximum
What are the specific privileges (e.g. fast-track/immediate removal of content notified), and responsibilities such
trusted flaggers should have, in your opinion, when flagging the different types of illegal content?
1000 character(s) maximum
Please score the following measures to support the uptake and deployment of automated tools for removal of
illegal content. Please score the measures below on a scale from 1 (very useful) to 5 (not useful).
I
1
2
3
4
5
don't
know
Sharing of best practices between industry players
Industry-governed sharing of software solutions
Industry shared governance of databases supporting filtering
technology
Industry shared governance of databases of training data for
detection algorithms
Publicly supported databases for filtering content, training
data, and/or technical tools
Public investment in research and development
Private investment in research and development
Requirements to deploy automated tools for detecting and/or
blocking content
Requirements to use shared databases for blocking content
Other
If other, please specify
36
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0037.png
What safeguards should be put in place when using automated tools for the detection and removal of illegal
content online? Please score the measures below on a scale from 1 (very useful) to 5 (not useful).
I
1
Transparency, in simple, clear language, of the general
principles for the algorithmic decision-making
Transparent reporting on the accuracy indicators for the
automated tools used
Audits and error-detection tests for algorithmic filtering and
algorithmic detection of illegal content
'Human in the loop' principle: include human review in the
processes leading to removal of content
Counter-notice procedures also when content removal
/blocking is decided through automated means
Other
2
3
4
5
don't
know
If other, please specify
What are the most effective safeguards to counter erroneous removal of legal content? Please score the
measures below on a scale from 1 (very effective) to 5 (not effective).
I
1
2
3
4
5
don't
know
Availability of counter-notice procedures
Information to the content provider on grounds for removal
Transparency on the process for removal
Transparent information on time from detection/notice to
removal of the different types of content
Transparent process for restoring content when counter-
notices have provided reasonable grounds to reject the
allegations of illegality
Encourage the use of out-of-court dispute settlement
Cooperation with third-parties such as self-regulatory bodies
or competent authorities, for consultation in difficult cases
37
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0038.png
Other
Other (please specify)
Have you introduced or do you intend to introduce changes in the measures your organisation takes against
illegal content, in view of
Recommendation on further measures to tackle illegal content online C(2018) 1177 final
?
If so, which ones?
1000 character(s) maximum
Please describe the challenges, obstacles and risks you are facing in tackling illegal content.
1000 character(s) maximum
Your opinion
In your opinion, who has an important role to play in tackling illegal content online?
Main
role
Internet users
Hosting service providers
Public and other competent authorities and
law enforcement bodies
Private entities affected by the spread of
illegal content (e.g. rights holders)
Individual victims affected by illegal content
Civil society and other organisations with
expertise who flag illegal content
Other
Important
role
Marginal
role
I
don't
know
No
answer
38
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0039.png
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Strongly
agree
*
The Internet is safe
for its users.
*
It is important that
there are
arrangements in place
so that no illegal
content is spread on
the Internet.
*
It is important that
freedom of expression
is protected online.
*
Hosting service
providers should
process all notifications
they receive and
assess the legality of
the content notified.
*
When content is
flagged as illegal by
private organisations
with proven expertise ,
hosting services
should speed up the
process for removing
the content.
Strongly
disagree
I
don't
know
No
answer
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
39
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0040.png
*
When content is
flagged as illegal by
competent authorities
or law enforcement
bodies, platforms
should speed up the
process for removing
the content
*
When online hosting
services remove
content, users should
be able to contest this
decision by contacting
the service (counter-
notice).
*
The regulatory
framework is effective
against illegal content.
*
Hosting service
providers are effective
in tackling illegal
content.
40
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0041.png
In your opinion, is there a need for further measures to tackle illegal content online?
Strongly
agree
Through proactive
measures taken by
hosting service
providers and other
relevant actors.
Via legislative
measures.
Actions should be
taken at EU level to put
appropriate measures
in place.
Different types of
illegal content should
be dealt with in
different legal
frameworks, to take
into account
specificities.
Strongly
disagree
I
don't
know
No
answer
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
41
 ERU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 284: Notat om dansk høringssvar om foranstaltninger til at forbedre bekæmpelsen af ulovligt indhold på internettet
1924644_0042.png
Are there additional comments you would like to make? Please detail, in particular, if your answers refer to
different experiences, different types of illegal content, etc.
500 character(s) maximum
Please note that the uploaded document will be published alongside your response to the questionnaire which is
the essential input to this open public consultation.
The maximum file size is 1 MB
Please feel free to upload a concise document, such as a position paper of relevance to this public consultation.
Your contribution
*
Note that, whatever option chosen, your answers may be subject to a request for public access to documents
under
Regulation (EC) N°1049/2001
can be published with your personal information
(I consent the publication of all information in my
contribution in whole or in part including my name or my organisation's name, and I declare that nothing
within my response is unlawful or would infringe the rights of any third party in a manner that would
prevent publication)
can be published provided that you remain anonymous
(I consent to the publication of any information
in my contribution in whole or in part (which may include quotes or opinions I express) provided that it is
done anonymously. I declare that nothing within my response is unlawful or would infringe the rights of any
third party in a manner that would prevent the publication.
Note that, whatever option chosen, your answers may be subject to a request for public access to documents
under
Regulation (EC) N°1049/2001
can be published with your organisation's information
(I consent the publication of all information in
my contribution in whole or in part including the name of my organisation, and I declare that nothing within
my response is unlawful or would infringe the rights of any third party in a manner that would prevent
publication)
can be published provided that your organisation remains anonymous
(I consent to the publication of
any information in my contribution in whole or in part (which may include quotes or opinions I express)
provided that it is done anonymously. I declare that nothing within my response is unlawful or would
infringe the rights of any third party in a manner that would prevent the publication.
42