SPÖ presents draft for stricter rules against online hate

Only if this request is not fulfilled and the applicant's claim is justified, should media operators bear the costs of the court proceedings. Those who quickly remove or correct content after a request will not be burdened with court costs. According to the draft, the new regulation is based on existing civil law cost-bearing rules and is intended to counteract abuse.

The background is the current legal situation, according to which media owners and social media users can also be held liable for insulting third-party content under their posts – even if they have voluntarily and immediately deleted the content in question before proceedings were initiated. This regulation has repeatedly been instrumentalized in the past for targeted mass warning letters, so-called warning letter campaigns.

Content of the Draft

Vice-Chancellor Babler emphasized the responsibility of site operators: "Site operators are responsible for the content that appears on their site – including insulting, defamatory, or hate comments." Victims of such posts will continue to be protected, Babler said. However, if the current legal situation is instrumentalized for profiteering, that must end.

Justice Minister Sporrer described the new regulation as "a balanced solution." Those who quickly remove or correct content after a request should not be burdened with court costs: "This allows us to maintain effective legal protection against online hate while simultaneously protecting, especially smaller media outlets and private individuals, from the unjustified exploitation of this indispensable legal remedy." It is detrimental to the rule of law when legal instruments are misused as a business model for profit.

From the ranks of the coalition partners, there was a reserved to critical reaction. Sophie Wotschke emphasized the goal of "placing responsibility where it actually lies." To charge someone with high costs for the misconduct of a third party, of which that person may not even be aware, "completely misses this goal." NEOS had previously called for a "quick fix" of the current legal situation itself.

Reactions from the Coalition

Alexander Pröll expressed doubts as to whether a change in liability rules would actually shift responsibility to where it lies: "As long as perpetrators can act under the protection of anonymity, any reform remains a partial solution." The final assessment of the draft by the governing parties is still pending.

Supreme Court on "Likes" under insulting comments

Independent of the political debate, the Supreme Court (OGH) recently also dealt with questions of responsibility on the internet, albeit in a civil law context. Specifically, it concerned an interim injunction for alleged defamation, in which a user was to be prohibited from "liking" insulting statements under a post.

According to the Supreme Court, a user had "liked" an insulting comment under a post. The applicant requested the issuance of an interim injunction, which would "in summary prohibit the user from 'liking' statements insulting the plaintiff," according to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court dismissed the interim injunction. In the specific case, it was to be assumed that the user's "Like" would be "perceived by average viewers of the Facebook profile as an expression of non-specific antipathy towards the plaintiff or towards the public display of his private marital bliss." "'Liking' does not automatically mean agreement with all aspects of a third party's statement," the highest court stated.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court clarified: "What is decisive is how average viewers perceive the 'Like' given to a particular piece of content." It is not decisive what the person who gave the "Like" intended to express. The proceedings were explicitly not criminal charges, but a civil dispute.

The coming weeks will show whether and in what form the draft will be introduced in parliament. Observers expect adjustments in detail, particularly regarding the interplay of out-of-court requests, deadlines, and cost allocation.