Notice and Action Mechanisms under DSA
This new topic is needed to specifically address the notice and action procedures that are central to DSA compliance, including how service providers must notify users of content moderation decisions, how authorities issue orders, and the procedural requirements for these mechanisms.
Overview
Legal Framework
The notice and action mechanisms are governed by the Digital Services Act (DSA), with Recitals 52 and 61 establishing core principles. Recital 52 mandates harmonized Union-level rules requiring the "timely, diligent and non-arbitrary processing" of notices. The mechanisms must be uniform, transparent, and include robust safeguards for fundamental rights. Recital 61 specifies that providers must prioritize the handling of notices submitted by trusted flaggers within their designated area of expertise, without prejudice to the obligation to process all notices diligently and without bias.
Practical Application
The DSA requires online platforms to establish clear, accessible procedures for users to submit notices about allegedly illegal content. The legal text, supported by the rationale in the recitals, interprets this as requiring a structured internal process. This process must ensure that every notice receives an assessment and that any decision to remove or restrict content is communicated to the affected user, including a statement of reasons and information on redress mechanisms. The prioritization for trusted flaggers, as noted in Recital 61, is operational; platforms must have systems to identify and expedite these qualified notices, but this cannot lead to the arbitrary dismissal of reports from other users.
Key Considerations
- Implement Clear Notice Channels: Establish a user-friendly, dedicated mechanism for content notices that is easily accessible and clearly explains the submission process and required information, as mandated by the DSA's transparency requirements.
- Document the Decision-Making Process: Maintain internal records demonstrating that all notices are assessed in a timely, objective, and consistent manner, with clear rationales for content moderation decisions to ensure non-arbitrary processing.
- Formalize Trusted Flagger Handling: Create a verified and transparent process for identifying trusted flaggers and ensure their prioritized notices are handled by personnel with appropriate expertise, while maintaining the same standard of diligence for all reports.
Laws (13)
Guidance (6)
Guidelines 02/2022 on the application of Article 60 GDPR
Guidelines on the application of Article 60 GDPR
With the introduction of the GDPR, the concept of the one-stop shop was established as one of the main innovations. In cross-border processing cases, the supervisory authority in the Member State of the controller's or processor's main establishment is the authority leading the enforcement of the GDPR for the respective cross-border processing activities, in cooperation with all the authorities which may face the effects of the processing activities at stake: be it through the establishments ...
Guidelines 4/2019 on Article 25 Data Protection by Design and by Default Version 2.0 Adopted on 20 October 2020
Guidelines on data protection by design and by default
Guidelines 9/2022 on personal data breach notification under GDPR
Guidelines on personal data breach notification under GDPR
Richtsnoeren 03/2021 voor de toepassing van artikel 65, lid 1, punt a), AVG
guidelines voor de toepassing van artikel 60 AVG
Versiegeschiedenis
guidelines meldplicht datalekken
Richtsnoeren 4/2019 inzake artikel 25 Gegevensbescherming door ontwerp en door standaardinstellingen
guidelines privacy by design en default