LEGISLATION

OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ("OJEU")

Commission Implementing Decision C(2013) 2235 of April 23, 2013, defining the practical arrangements, uniform formats and a methodology in relation to the radio spectrum inventory established by Decision 243/2012/UE of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy program. (OJEU L-113, April 25, 2013)

OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF THE SPANISH STATE ("BOE")

Telecommunications: Resolution of March 20, 2013, by the Telecommunications Market Commission, publishing Circular 1/2013, on the procedure for supplying subscribers’ data for directories, telephone enquiries and emergency services numbers. (BOE 99, April 25, 2013)

REGIONAL LEGISLATION

AUTONOMOUS REGION OF CATALONIA – OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF THE CATALAN REGIONAL GOVERNMENT ("DOGC")

APPEAL ON GROUNDS OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY 6687-2012, against articles 7, 9 and 10 of Catalan Parliament Act 2/2013, of February 22, amending several laws relating to audiovisual matters. (DOGC 6340, March 21, 2013)

CASE LAW

Ruling of the Supreme Court of March 4, 2013. The Supreme Court delimits Google’s responsibility for links. News articles in which someone is charged with an offense will only be deleted in the case of acquittal.

Google is declared not responsible for links that implicate a person in specific criminal activities. The ruling limits future cases arising under article 17 of the Information Society Services and Electronic Commerce Act, regulating the liability of service providers that provide links to contents or search tools. This regulation establishes that service providers are not responsible for the information they send to their service receivers, provided they have no effective knowledge that the activity or information being sent or recommended is illicit; or, if they have effective knowledge, "they act diligently to delete or deactivate the relevant link." A service provider has "effective knowledge" "when a competent authority has declared the data illegal, has ordered its removal or blocking, or when damages have been declared to exist, and the provider knows of this resolution, without prejudice to the detection and content withdrawal procedures that providers apply under voluntary agreements and other means of effective knowledge that could be established."

This ruling confirms the judgment under appeal in the Madrid Court of Appeal and ensures that "the fact that the person considering himself to be the injured party asked Google to remove the information he considered illegal does not guarantee that this request will be fulfilled if, as occurs here, the information itself was not obviously illegal."