Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Yttrandefrihetsrätt eller fel? - En analys av ändamålsenligheten hos den yttrandefrihetsrättsliga ansvarsregleringen för databaser

Linnér, Christoffer LU (2019) LAGF03 20191
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Regleringen av det yttrandefrihetsrättsliga ansvarssystemet har gett och fortsätter att ge upphov till komplicerade intresseavvägningar mellan å ena sidan friheten att yttra sig, och å andra sidan möjligheterna att beivra yttrandefrihetsbrott.

Efter att det tidigare rättsläget beträffande en utgivares ansvar för databaspubliceringar uppmärksammats som olämpligt genomfördes en grundlagsändring som trädde ikraft 1 januari 2019. Denna ändring har med beaktande av ansvarssystemets motstående bakomliggande intressen varit omdiskuterad utifrån olika perspektiv och har beskrivits få otillfredsställande konsekvenser utifrån vardera intresse. Detta har föranlett denna uppsats med syfte att analysera regleringens ändamålsenlighet i förhållande... (More)
Regleringen av det yttrandefrihetsrättsliga ansvarssystemet har gett och fortsätter att ge upphov till komplicerade intresseavvägningar mellan å ena sidan friheten att yttra sig, och å andra sidan möjligheterna att beivra yttrandefrihetsbrott.

Efter att det tidigare rättsläget beträffande en utgivares ansvar för databaspubliceringar uppmärksammats som olämpligt genomfördes en grundlagsändring som trädde ikraft 1 januari 2019. Denna ändring har med beaktande av ansvarssystemets motstående bakomliggande intressen varit omdiskuterad utifrån olika perspektiv och har beskrivits få otillfredsställande konsekvenser utifrån vardera intresse. Detta har föranlett denna uppsats med syfte att analysera regleringens ändamålsenlighet i förhållande till lagstiftarens intentioner, vilket gjorts genom att jämföra lagstiftarens bild av regleringens konsekvenser med alternativa konsekvensbeskrivningar i bl.a. remissyttranden och doktrin.

Analysen har visat att lagstiftarens primära intentioner med grundlagsändringen varit att begränsa en databasutgivares ansvar bakåt i tiden, säkerställa den svenska regleringens kompabilitet med Europakonventionen och att inte påtagligt förändra balansen mellan ansvarsregleringens bakomliggande intressen. På vilka sätt och i vilken utsträckning regleringen medför dessa konsekvenser har av andra ifrågasatts samtidigt som andra oberäknade konsekvenser presenterats. Sammantaget har analysen visat att även om konsekvenserna av regelverket till övervägande delar är motiverade och beaktade, så finns utrymme att ifrågasätta dess ändamålsenlighet med intentionerna som funnits med den. (Less)
Abstract
The regulation of the freedom of expression liability system has given and continues to give rise to complex balances of interests between the freedom of expression on the one hand, and the possibilities of proving freedom of expression on the other hand.

After the previous legal situation regarding a publisher's responsibility for database publications was recognized as inappropriate, a constitutional amendment that came into force on January 1, 2019 was implemented. This amendment has, with the underlying interests of the freedom of expression liability system in mind, been considered controversial and described to give unsatisfying consequences based on each interest. This has led to this essay with the purpose of analyzing the... (More)
The regulation of the freedom of expression liability system has given and continues to give rise to complex balances of interests between the freedom of expression on the one hand, and the possibilities of proving freedom of expression on the other hand.

After the previous legal situation regarding a publisher's responsibility for database publications was recognized as inappropriate, a constitutional amendment that came into force on January 1, 2019 was implemented. This amendment has, with the underlying interests of the freedom of expression liability system in mind, been considered controversial and described to give unsatisfying consequences based on each interest. This has led to this essay with the purpose of analyzing the congruity of the regulation in relation to the intentions of the legislator, which has been done by comparing the legislator's depiction of the consequences of the regulation with alternative impact assessments in eg. comment letters and doctrine.

The analysis has shown that the primary intentions with the constitutional amendment of the legislator has been to limit the responsibility of a database publisher back in time, ensure the compatibility of the Swedish regulation with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and not to significantly change the balance between the underlying interests of the liability regulation. In what ways and to what extent the regulation entails these consequences have been questioned at the same time as other unexpected consequences have been presented. All in all, the analysis has shown that although the consequences of the regulatory framework are predominantly motivated and taken into account, there is room to question its congruity in comparison with the intentions of the legislator. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Linnér, Christoffer LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20191
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
language
Swedish
id
8976917
date added to LUP
2019-09-16 10:39:20
date last changed
2019-09-16 10:39:20
@misc{8976917,
  abstract     = {{The regulation of the freedom of expression liability system has given and continues to give rise to complex balances of interests between the freedom of expression on the one hand, and the possibilities of proving freedom of expression on the other hand. 

After the previous legal situation regarding a publisher's responsibility for database publications was recognized as inappropriate, a constitutional amendment that came into force on January 1, 2019 was implemented. This amendment has, with the underlying interests of the freedom of expression liability system in mind, been considered controversial and described to give unsatisfying consequences based on each interest. This has led to this essay with the purpose of analyzing the congruity of the regulation in relation to the intentions of the legislator, which has been done by comparing the legislator's depiction of the consequences of the regulation with alternative impact assessments in eg. comment letters and doctrine.

The analysis has shown that the primary intentions with the constitutional amendment of the legislator has been to limit the responsibility of a database publisher back in time, ensure the compatibility of the Swedish regulation with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and not to significantly change the balance between the underlying interests of the liability regulation. In what ways and to what extent the regulation entails these consequences have been questioned at the same time as other unexpected consequences have been presented. All in all, the analysis has shown that although the consequences of the regulatory framework are predominantly motivated and taken into account, there is room to question its congruity in comparison with the intentions of the legislator.}},
  author       = {{Linnér, Christoffer}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Yttrandefrihetsrätt eller fel? - En analys av ändamålsenligheten hos den yttrandefrihetsrättsliga ansvarsregleringen för databaser}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}