Quote:
Originally Posted by Head_on_a_Stick
|
Thank you for this law oriented analysis. I find this paragraph very interesting:
Quote:
Unless he refused to remove or act over specific individual content specified by the French authorities, or unless he set up Telegram with the specific intent of facilitating organised crime, I do not see how Durov is not protected under Articles 20 and 30 and other safeguards found in the Digital Services Act.
|
If the French authorities did make demands, it looks like Telegram did not answer them. This has been reported by TF1 [1](French TV channel) and Le Monde (French daily newspaper)[2].
From TF1:
Quote:
Le milliardaire franco-russe était sous la menace d’un mandat de recherche français, notamment pour l’absence de modération et de coopération avec les forces de l’ordre par Telegram.
|
My attempt at a translation would be:
Quote:
The Franco-Russian billionaire was under the threat of a French search warrant for lack of moderation and cooperation with the authorities concerning Telegram.
|
From Le Monde:
Quote:
The investigation also focuses on a very specific point, at the heart of the complaints leveled at Telegram by multiple governments over the past decade: the "refusal to communicate, at the request of the authorized authorities, the information or documents needed to carry out and use the interceptions authorized by law."
|
[1]
https://www.tf1info.fr/high-tech/tel...e-2316094.html
[2]
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/pixels/art...722400_13.html