Standards of Liability for Internet Service Providers: A Comparative Study of France and the United States with a Specific Focus on Copyright, Defamation, and Illicit Content

Cornell International Law Journal Volume 35 Issue 1 November 2001 - February 2002 Article 4 Standards of Liability for Internet Service Providers: A Comparative Study of France and the United States with a Specific Focus on Copyright, Defamation, and Illicit Content Xavier Amadei Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Amadei, Xavier (2001) "Standards of Liability for Internet Service Providers: A Comparative Study of France and the United States with a Specific Focus on Copyright, Defamation, and Illicit Content," Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 35: Iss. 1, Article 4. Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj/vol35/iss1/4 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell International Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact . Standards of Liability for Internet Service Providers: A Comparative Study of France and the United States with a Specific Focus on Copyright, Defamation, and Illicit Content Xavier Amadei* Introduction ..................................................... I. Background .............................................. A. Tradition as Illusion of Permanence: Definition of an Editorial Liability for ISPs ............................. 1. Common Law Editorial Liability in the United States. 2. Editorial Liability in France ........................ B. ISP Liability for Copyright Infringement ............... 1. Artificial Distinctions and Confusion in the United States ............................................. 2. A Famous Illustration of ISP Liability for Third Party Copyright Infringement in the United States: Napster. 3. France: General Law Approach and Case Law Loophole .......................................... a. ISP Liability for Copyright Infringement Under the French Civil Code ......................... b. The Still Unexplored Application of Penal Complicity to ISPs ............................ II. Interrelated Developments of Similar Statutory Solutions.. A. Autonomous Developments and Common Underlying Factors ............................................... 1. The Efficiency Argument ........................... 2. The Technical Issue ................................ 3. Common Weaknesses in Assessing ISP Liability ....... B. Reactive Enactments to the Case Law .................. 190 193 193 193 195 197 19 7 202 203 203 206 207 20 7 207 209 209 211 * Candidate for JD-Maitrise en droit des affaires internationales (Cornell-Paris I); ESSEC-MBA, Ecole Suprieure des Sciences Economiques et Commerciales (Paris); Masters, International Economic Relations, Institut d'Etudes Politiques (Paris). I wish to thank the former and the current Cornell InternationalLaw Journal Boards of Editors for their support and their helpful comments. I especially thank Annette Gifford, Kat Kinkade, and Aaron Wasserman. I also thank Ann Marie Luciano and H. Slim for their comments relating to French case law and regulations. 35 CORNELL INT'L LJ. 189 (Nov. 2001-Feb. 2002) Cornell International Law Journal 1. Freedom of Speech and Liberte d'Expression Concerns .......................................... 2. Legislatures' Concerns with Case Law Uncertainties C. The U.S. and French Statutory Frameworks: Evolution and Com parison ...................................... 1. The Communication Decency Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act .......................... a. ISP Liability Under Defamation Law and for Indecent and Obscene Content ................ b. ISP Liability Under Copyright Law ............. 2. French Enactments and Comparison to the U.S. Legislation ........................................ a. Evolution ..................................... b. Domestic and International Influences ......... c. The Asymptotic Convergence of French and U .S. Legislation ............................... d. Recent Developments Should Increase the Pace of Convergence ................................ III. Outstanding International Differences .................... A. The Yahoo! Case ...................................... B. A Traditional Solution and a Challenge to U.S. Constitutional Rights .................................. 1. An Original Application of a TraditionalLegal A nalysis ........................................... 2. Divergent Substantive Laws ......................... 3. Jurisdiction and the Internet: French and U.S. A pproaches ........................................ Conclusion and Recommendations ............................... Vol. 35 2 11 212 212 213 213 214 216 216 216 217 219 220 220 221 22 1 223 224 226 Introduction The Internet has evolved from a closed network (then called Arpanet)1 available to a limited number of U.S. officials. and universities to a worldwide network available to virtually anybody, through the World Wide Web (the Web). 2 This evolution resulted in the dissemination of digital information, coded in HyperText Markup Protocol (HTML) and available at its 1. The Pentagon created Arpanet in 1969, after two scientists at UCLA had managed to connect two computers together. Nicolas Valluet, Presentation Generale des Nouvelles Technologies de Communication et d'Information, LES PETITES AFFICHES, no. 134, at 8 (Nov. 6, 1996). 2. Id. The Internet is distinct from the World Wide Web. Internet represents an infrastructure (all the computers linked together), a community of users, and the data they share. The World Wide Web is a network of computers linked together on the Internet that deliver data through their virtual links. Fran~oise Tajan, Presentation d'Internet et d'un Serveur Web, LEs PETITES AFFICHES, no. 134, at 10 (Nov. 6, 1996); see also Alain Strowel & Nicolas Ide, Liability of Internet Intermediaries:Recent Developments and the Question of Hyperlinks, 185 REVUE INTERNATIONALE DU DROIT D'AUTEUR 3, 15-23 (2000). 2001-2002 Standards of Liability for Internet Service Providers 191 unique address, the Uniform Resource Locator (URL). 3 Both the codification and the localization of digital information make it available from any computer connected to the World Wide Web through a software, the browser. 4 Posting, finding, and accessing information on the Web is made possible by intermediaries: the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that encompass Internet Access Providers (IAPs), Internet Content Providers 5 (ICPs), and Logical Access Providers (LAPs). The accessibility of vast amounts of information has challenged the traditional legal structure of intellectual property law and of torts. Posting information on the Web and copying possibly copyrighted materials is fairly easy. This explains why defamation and copyright infringement have revealed the weaknesses of the traditional legal structure and proves the accompanying need for adaptation and leg (...truncated)