2005.10.15 pranešimas VU KF konferencijoje

1. Internet portals in the
Baltic States: legal
issues
Liutauras Ulevičius
Mykolas Romeris University
Vilnius – October 15th, 2005

2. The Problem
Internet has matured into a commodity
Internet portals have gained daily
audiences throughout the Baltic States
Social relations intensify on the virtual
arena
Old legal rules does not fit for a new
situation

3. The Solution
Expert analysis Analysis of the
Identification of “the situation in the
weakest links” market
Legal procedures to Owners and chief
update existing editors of the
regulation internet portals
Daily legal issues

4. The Methodology
• Ist phase:
 Legal review, data (expert opinions) from
the market leaders
 The most common issues
• IInd phase:
 Questionnaires
 Statistical analysis

5. Ist phase
Expertise in-place
 “Media law” (LT)
 “kavkazcenter.com” (LT-FIN-..)
 juudid ahju / Olev Hannula (EE)
Legal regulation analysis (systematic)
Legal comparison

6. Expertise in-place (I)
“Media law” by Liudvika Meškauskaitė
 Internet media (incl. Internet portals) are
“means of mass communication” (liet.
visuomenės informavimo priemonės)
 Content control is not in line with the
Constitution due to the wrong legal form
(according to the Convention human rights
should be regulated by law)

7. Expertise in-place (II)
“kavkazcenter.com”
 Internet media are nor regulated by the
Law of Mass communication
 Two separate regimes:
 The law of Mass communication
 The Police law and governmental content
control order

8. Expertise in-place (III)
Olev Hannula vs. Estonian society
 Competition of principles:
 Free speech (a right to comment)
 Public order, no racism
 Olev's appeal failed
 Race vs. Nation (“arab” comment case)

9. Legal regulation analysis
Draft law on Mass communication
(Press law)
 Subject responsible for a legal act
 Paradigm of “mean of mass
communication in information society” (liet.
informacinės visuomenės informavimo
priemonė)
LV intiatives
 Draft law, internet media chapter excluded

10. Expert opinions
Delfi editors
 LT – generaly supports draft law
 LV – oposes draft law, sugests to add user
created content (UCC) issues
 EE – no special law for media
Omni.lt, bernardinai.lt editors
 LT – mostly concerned with intellectual
property issues (e.g. deep linking), UCC

11. Conclusions (Ist phase)
The most common issues to be dealt
with:
 A right to comment
 A responsible subject (author vs.
editor/owner)
 Legal mechanism – Press law, Police law,
etc.

12. Thank You!
Liutauras Ulevičius
Mykolas Romeris University
iutas@mruni. t, +370-686-08820