EU: take down illegal content (terror/hate speech) within 1 hour or face millions in fines


Nov 25, 2018
This is not about copyright. its about abusive content.

Thank you for the clarification. It confused me because Julia Reda was talking about upload filters which concerns Article 13 (17) as well.


May 28, 2007
Here is the text as it was last August:
It did change but I do not see where the updated text is. If anyone can find it.

Here is the main portal of the EU's directives on Illegal Content on Online Platforms:

It concerns a number of proposals regarding:
  • Incitement to terrorism
  • Hate Speech
  • Child Abuse
  • Copyright
  • Consumer protection

Here is what the EU wants to have implemented:

Online platforms need to exercise a greater responsibility in content governance. The recommendation proposes a common approach to swiftly and proactively detect, remove and prevent the reapparence of content online:
  • Clearer 'notice and action' procedures: Companies should set out easy and transparent rules for notifying illegal content, including fast-track procedures for 'trusted flaggers'. To avoid the unintended removal of content which is not illegal, content providers should be informed about such decisions and have the opportunity to contest them.
  • More efficient tools and proactive technologies: Companies should set out clear notification systems for users. They should have proactive tools to detect and remove illegal content, in particular for terrorism content and for content which does not need contextualisation to be deemed illegal, such as child sexual abuse material or counterfeited goods.
  • Stronger safeguards to ensure fundamental rights: To ensure that decisions to remove content are accurate and well-founded, especially when automated tools are used, companies should put in place effective and appropriate safeguards, including human oversight and verification, in full respect of fundamental rights, freedom of expression and data protection rules.
  • Special attention to small companies: The industry should, through voluntary arrangements, cooperate and share experiences, best practices and technological solutions, including tools allowing for automatic detection. This shared responsibility should particularly benefit smaller platforms with more limited resources and expertise.
  • Closer cooperation with authorities: If there is evidence of a serious criminal offence or a suspicion that illegal content is posing a threat to life or safety, companies should promptly inform law enforcement authorities. Member States are encouraged to establish the appropriate legal obligations.


Nov 25, 2018
If your website has been online for less than 3 years AND makes less than 10 million then the regulation is more relaxed. So any site older than 3 years then there is a 1 hour deadline.
The first time you receive a notice, there is a 12 hour deadline. Which is still insane.

The 3 year, 10 million rules are for Articles 11 (15) and 13 (17) only. Right? Or it applies to TerReg as well?

Yeah 12 hours is still ridiculous.
Last edited:


Oct 24, 2004
This legislation is a great idea on paper, but that's it. It's terrible on it's implementation. This entire piece of legislation is ridiculous.

People look at the exact same thing, and can have two very different opinions. For example, if we look at the US Civil War, the North viewed it as the "Great Rebellion". The EU looks at it as the War of Secession. The South looks at it as the War for Southern Independence.

I think the lyrics from Wicked is spot on for this:

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist


Magical Developer
Apr 25, 2019
It kind of reminds me of this quote:

"The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia." - Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull.

These politicians think they're gods who can make things happen by simply snapping their fingers and demanding it. If they could, they would probably pass a law against hurricanes or storms entering their jurisdiction, and then, they would sue God for daring to break it.

Maybe, they should focus on more tangible issues like violence on the streets, rising unconfidence in their leadership, etc. than finding yet another way to create yet more problems.
Last edited: