Australian Federal Government

Mask Off: Social Media Giants to Unmask Trolls or Risk Themselves Becoming Liable for Defamation Payouts

Dec 01 2021

By Cameron Abbott, Rob Pulham, Warwick Andersen, Max Evans and James Gray

In a significant development in online regulatory oversight, the Australian government announced over the weekend that it will introduce new laws handing Australian courts the power to order social media companies to reveal the identities of anonymous trolls or risk themselves being liable for defamation payouts.

The so called “social media anti-trolling legislation” which the government has said will be introduced into parliament this week proposes to require social media companies stand up a functional and easy-to-use complaints and takedown process for users, who upon suspecting they are being defamed, bullied or attacked may file a complaint with the social media platform requesting that the relevant content be removed.

If that request is denied, the complainant can ask the social media company to provide the details of the “troll” so as to enable the complainant to commence an action. If this request is further denied, or if the social media platform is “unable to do this”, complainants may apply to obtain a court order requiring the social media company to release the identification details of the anonymous user so that a defamation action may be pursued. Failure to comply with such a court order will render the social media company themselves liable for the defamation claim.

Significantly, the reports indicate that these new laws will push legal responsibility for defamatory content from the author or page manager to the social media company which runs the platform. This represents a key move away from social media platforms being distributors of content but rather, in the eyes of online safety, being deemed publishers themselves. We will keep you posted as these proposed laws progress.

New US / Aus cross-border data access regime

Jul 12 2021

By Cameron Abbott, Warwick Andersen and Jacqueline Patishman

The Telecommunications Legislations Amendment (International Orders) Bill 2020 has just cleared both houses of parliament. The new bill establishes a reciprocal cross-border data access regime between the United States and Australia which will allow for cross-border communications between foreign governments for national security and law enforcement purposes.

Nov 06 2020

By Cameron Abbott, Rob Pulham and Keely O’Dowd

In December 2019, the Australian Government announced it would conduct a review of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).

A year has almost passed and finally the Australian Government has publicly released details about the review. On 30 October 2020, the Australian Government released the Terms of Reference of the review. In particular, the review will cover:

The scope and application of the Privacy Act
Whether the Privacy Act effectively protects personal information and provides a practical and proportionate framework for promoting good privacy practices
Whether individuals should have direct rights of action to enforce privacy obligations under the Privacy Act
Whether a statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy should be introduced into Australian law
The impact of the notifiable data breach scheme and its effectiveness in meeting its objectives
The effectiveness of enforcement powers and mechanisms under the Privacy Act and how they interact with other Commonwealth regulatory frameworks
The desirability and feasibility of an independent certification scheme to monitor and demonstrate compliance with Australian privacy laws.

No news is good news…not always!

Sep 03 2020

By Cameron Abbott, Michelle Aggromito and Max Evans

The Commonwealth Government is proposing to introduce a controversial new mandatory code that intends to regulate digital platforms and their distribution of news content.

May 07 2020

By Cameron Abbott and Keely O’Dowd

There has never been a better time to #WashYourCyberHands.

The COVID-19 pandemic has provided the perfect breeding ground for cyber criminals to capitalise on, and exploit the outbreak of the virus to steal data, commit fraud and circulate online scams. Law enforcement agencies and the cybersecurity industry have seen an increase in the number of targeted cyberattacks by criminals since the outbreak began.

INTERPOL has announced it is launching a global campaign to raise awareness about the top coronavirus related cyber threats throughout the globe. The campaign will provide basic cyber hygiene advice to businesses and individuals on how to ‘wash your cyber hands’ and protect systems and data from cyber threats.

Apr 21 2020

By Cameron Abbott, Warwick Andersen, Rob Pulham and Max Evans

We previously blogged about the plethora of Asian countries who are using telecommunications networks, smart phone applications and messaging services to inform, track and monitor individuals who may have contracted COVID-19. It appears that Australia’s eyes are on similar technology opportunities, as according to an article from the SMH, the Federal Government will ask Australians “within weeks” to opt in and sign up for a mobile application that uses tracking data to alert individuals as to their risks of contracting COVID-19.

According to the article, the relevant application will monitor the movements of participants to inform individuals whether they have been close to someone already infected with COVID-19. The application also has the functionality to enable someone who has contracted the virus to notify health authorities and ensure that an alert is sent to anyone he or she has been in contact with over the previous 24 hours. Both of these processes are part of what is known as “contact tracing”.

Sharing of ‘abhorrent violent material’ now an offence under new laws

May 09 2019

By Cameron Abbott, Michelle Aggromito and Rebecca Gill

Governments around the world are imposing more responsibilities on tech providers to deal with online harms. In response to the recent attacks in Christchurch, in which a gunman livestreamed on Facebook his attack on a mosque, the Australian Government recently enacted the Criminal Code Amendment (Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material) Act 2019 (Cth) (Act). The Act, which commenced on 6 April 2019, was pushed through swiftly and has a broad reach.

Under the Act, internet, content and hosting service providers must refer details of any ‘abhorrent violent material’ that records or streams ‘abhorrent violent conduct’ to the Australian Federal Police. Abhorrent violent material is material that is audio, visual or audio-visual, and that records or streams ‘abhorrent violent conduct’. Such conduct includes acts of terrorism, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape and kidnapping.

Consumer Data Right Draft Rules – submissions closing soon

May 06 2019

By Cameron Abbott, Rob Pulham and Rebecca Gill

The deadline for submissions on the ACCC’s draft Competition and Consumer (Consumer Data) Rules 2019 (Draft Rules) is fast approaching. The ACCC is seeking feedback from community organisations, businesses and consumers on the approach and positions of the Draft Rules for the Consumer Data Right (CDR) regime until this Friday, 10 May 2019.

Key aspects of the Draft Rules (which are available on the ACCC’s website) include:

the three ways in which CDR data may be requested;
the requirements for consent to collect CDR data;
rules relating to the accreditation process; and
rules relating to the thirteen privacy safeguards for CDR data.

Major political parties join the Federal Parliament in the February data breach

Feb 21 2019

By Cameron Abbott and Ella Richards

Following an unprecedented surge in cyber attacks against Australian businesses, an attack on Australia’s political infrastructure was imminent. New information reveals that the cyber attack against the Federal Parliament earlier this year was accompanied by yet another directed towards the Liberal, Labour and National parties.

To encrypt or not encrypt? That is the question

Feb 18 2019

By Cameron Abbott and Ella Richards

In response to the new controversial anti-encryption laws, Australian tech heavyweights have banded together to kick and scream over the restrictive implications the laws are already having on their industry.

Quick history lesson; the Assistance and Access Bill permit law enforcement to demand companies running applications such as Whatsapp to allow “lawful access to information”. This can be through either decryption of encrypted technology, or providing access to communications which are not yet encrypted. These ‘backdoors’ are intended to provide the good guys with the opportunity to fight serious crime, however there’s serious fear that in reality, these doors could throw out privacy or let in unwanted guests.

While the legislation states that backdoors should only be created if it doesn’t result in any ‘systemic weakness’; this is yet to be defined in a concrete and informative way. Industry points out that once created any such measure has the potential to be exploited by others. There is no such thing as a “once” only back door.

There is little doubt that this will end up in litigation as larger industry players challenge the abstract concepts in the legislation against the reality of their technology.

StartupAUS, an industry group of tech executives, have made several recommendations to amend the legislation. Even though they’re not holding their breath for any significant changes, they’re demanding more transparency around the requirements. Their recommendations include scrapping the requirement for an employee to build capabilities to intercept communications, tightening the scope of ‘designated communication providers’, giving oversight on how companies will be targeted and increasing what constitutes a ‘serious offence’.

Australia’s legislative response to the problem faced by law enforcement is one of the most heavy handed in the democratic world, and now has the world of technology companies with their significant impact on our economy watching the latest debate on reforms with great concern.

Tag:Australian Federal Government