iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Jennifer Cobbe @jennifercobbe.bsky.social · 08/10/2026

Hot on the heels of the CJEU taking the position on EU law's intermediary liability shields and recommender systems that we argued in 2019, it's good to see the Law Commission proposing this kind of approach to platforms' liability only 7 years after we called for it

2.92 The design components and features of social media platforms, such as recommender algorithms that curate content shown to users, the “infinite scroll” and content filters, form part of the platform’s architecture and are deliberately designed and incorporated by its developers, much as a traditional product is designed and produced. These design choices, and the platform behaviour they produce, have the
potential to cause harm and should therefore attract liability under the CPA in the same manner as any other product. This would render providers potentially liable under the CPA for harm caused by the design of their platforms and the unique features they have built into them.

2.93 The design components and features of social media platforms that would fall within the definition of a product for the purposes of the CPA include, but are not limited to,
the following.
(1) Algorithms, such as social media recommender algorithms. Algorithms are software procedures that transform data inputs into outputs by sorting and
ordering the data. These outputs underpin functions such as content ranking and recommendation.101 Platforms deploy algorithms to recommend content most likely to maximise engagement of users based on their behaviour and interests, as well as to moderate content and deliver targeted advertising.

User-generated content and third-party content

2.96 Our proposal does not engage with, or seek to regulate, a platform’s role as a host of user-generated content, nor does it attribute liability to platforms for the substance of
third-party material. It is instead confined to defects in design. The critical distinction is between content and the platform architecture through which that content is organised, prioritised and delivered. Some design components and features, including
recommender systems, necessarily take account of the characteristics of the content they process, as well as user behaviour, predicted engagement and inferred preferences. The relevant question is therefore not whether a feature or component interacts with content, but whether the alleged defect lies in the platform’s design or
operation, rather than in the meaning, lawfulness or viewpoint of any particular item of content. In other words, the regime would apply to how the platform functions, not to the content it carries.

2.97 On this basis, liability would arise where harm is caused by design components and features such as algorithms which select, organise and amplify content. Harm attributable to individual items of content, taken in isolation, would fall outside the
regime, as the harm would derive from what is being posted, rather than how that content is being pushed or presented to users. In practice, harm rarely stems from a single piece of content, but from how a large volume of similar kinds of content is
encountered by users, as a result of recommender algorithms that target content at particular individuals. 109 It is the cause of this amplification of content, in this case the algorithm, rather than the underlying content itself, that could attract liability under the
CPA. Similarly, liability could attach where a platform’s design means that it fails to screen adequately for particular forms of content. In such circumstances, any liability
would arise from t…

120

Graham Smith @cyberleagle.bsky.social · 08/10/2026

They say that their proposal doesn't touch the ECommerce Directive hosting shield. This is going to require a wet towel...

010