The proposed social media ban, the EU KIDS Act, is perhaps the most chaotic law I have ever read!
New paper: Are EU Kidding Me? Notes from a Poorly Drafted Social Media Ban. files.michae.lv/papers/veale_areEUkiddingme.pdf
In the spirit of the proposal I have stayed offline and read no takes.
![The explanatory notes at the start of the document dump explains that "on 31 March the [Cabinet Office] wrote to Peter Mandelson - via his solicitors - to request any information held on his personal phone.
"Peter Mandelson declined to comply with this request. The government has no further recourse to search the personal devices of Peter Mandelson."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ujstglmdsoymx3t2yffcvgtm/bafkreigqc2bd5jar3nor6rkoqmfj32tacxf4jef2eejwgau4efst2wmnj4)
![Social media company means any information service [cont.]…
The term does not include any information service, system, Internet search engine, or access software provider operated by a company that owns and operates a theme park or entertainment complex as defined in s. 509.013.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ujstglmdsoymx3t2yffcvgtm/bafkreicejfu7ghvtrtizcgcyfvq6fhbk4f6wgudbmnrueweqvukgjqao7a)
![[41] It follows from all the foregoing considerations that (..) Article 2(b) and (d) of Directive 95/46 are to be interpreted as meaning that, first, the activity of a search engine consisting in finding information published or placed on the internet by third parties, indexing it automatically, storing it temporarily and, finally, making it available to internet users according to a particular order of preference must be classified as ‘processing of personal data’ within the meaning of Article 2(b) when that information contains personal data and, second, the operator of the search engine must be regarded as the ‘controller’ in respect of that processing, within the meaning of Article 2(d).
Data protection sees a search engine as a controller, determining the means and purposes of the processing of personal data, while intermediary liability law sees a search engine as a passive host, without knowledge of illegal content and not liable for it. Are these regimes in conflict? If so, how, and if not, why not?
END OF PAPER](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ujstglmdsoymx3t2yffcvgtm/bafkreid6urbdmig5zxf6vlc377tjzzv3r3frbeoxfeyy75impdtfgsqypu)
