The Criminal Court affirmed the lower court’s decision and declared Taringa's stay of proceedings, a site that hosts content uploaded by its users. María Kodama, heir to Jorge Luis Borges, brought a lawsuit against Taringa based on her rights to the work authored by her husband. The Criminal Court decided on the basis of "Rodríguez", applying the same standard to a service different from a search engine. According to the Criminal Court, Google and Taringa are both "intermediaries whose main objective is to serve as a link" and reaffirmed that "there is not an obligation to verify the content ex ante but afterwards in case it is reported". The Court stated that "search engines" (or platforms like Taringa) are responsible for third-party content when they have "actual knowledge" of the unlawfulness of such content. Since Taringa had already removed the content in issue upon notice, it was not liable for the intellectual property infringement.
Cámara Nacional de Apelaciones en lo Criminal y Correccional, Sala I [National Criminal Court of Appeals], Expte. N° 21964 / 2014, May 5, 2015
Document type
Court Decision
Country
Country
Year
2015
Topic, claim, or defense
Copyright
Freedom of Expression
Document type
Court Decision
Issuing entity
Appellate Domestic Court
Type of service provider
Host (Including Social Networks)
Search Engine or Index
Issues addressed
Trigger for OSP obligations
OSP obligation considered
Block or Remove
Monitor or Filter
Type of liability
Primary
Negligence Liability
Tort/Extracontractual Liability
General effect on immunity
Strengthens Immunity
General intermediary liability model
Takedown/Act Upon Knowledge (Includes Notice and Takedown)
Takedown/Act Upon Court Order