✓ verbatim from the press ? no verbatim passage
Supreme Court Justice André Mendonça argued that new rules for holding digital platforms accountable for third-party content may create an "inhibitory effect" on freedom of expression. During Thursday's (11th) judgment on clarification appeals regarding the Civil Internet Framework, Mendonça argued that "we are creating an inhibitory effect, because platforms, rightfully, to preserve themselves, will exclude content when in doubt about the content." ✓
Press quotes (1)
"Estamos gerando um efeito inibidor, porque as plataformas, com razão, para se preservar, vão excluir conteúdos havendo dúvidas sobre o conteúdo"
Mendonça's position diverged from Justice Flávio Dino, who countered by stating that "in practice, there is no significant restriction on the circulation of illicit content" on social networks. According to O Antagonista, Dino questioned the "inhibitory effect" premise by declaring that "if you open your social network, you'll find 50 crimes there, there's no inhibitory effect at all." ✓
Press quotes (1)
"O ministro Flávio Dino rebateu o argumento do colega ao defender que, na prática, não há restrição significativa à circulação de conteúdos ilícitos nas redes."
The debate occurred during analysis of appeals presented against the STF decision that partially invalidated article 19 of the Civil Internet Framework, in appeals RE 1.037.396 and RE 1.057.258. According to Migalhas, the court "concluded, this Thursday, 11th, in plenary, the judgment of clarification appeals in the appeals that deal with civil liability of digital platforms for content published by users." ✓
Press quotes (2)
"STF concluiu, nesta quinta-feira, 11, em plenário, o julgamento de embargos de declaração nos recursos que tratam da responsabilização civil de plataformas digitais por conteúdos publicados por usuários"
"Os ministros formaram o placar de 4 votos a 0 para rejeitar os chamados embargos de declaração do ex-presidente e de mais seis réus para reverter as condenações e evitar a execução das penas em regime fechado."
Reporting Justice Dias Toffoli proposed a 60-day deadline for platforms to implement the structural obligations of the new thesis, while maintaining the requirement for representation in Brazil for all application providers operating in the country. The original decision from June 2025 established that "internet application providers will be held civilly liable, under the terms of article 21 of the Civil Internet Framework, for damages arising from content generated by third parties in cases of crime or illicit acts." ?
Press quotes (1)
"o provedor de aplicações de internet será responsabilizado civilmente, nos termos do artigo 21 do Marco Civil da Internet, pelos danos decorrentes de conteúdos gerados por terceiros em casos de crime ou atos ilícitos"
STF granted 60-day deadline for implementation of measures by digital platforms
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (2)
Dino presented specific technical divergences about crimes against honor and temporal modulation
Toffoli maintained broad requirement for representation in Brazil for all providers
-
What was the final vote of the other justices on Dino's specific divergences?
Why it's still unknown: Sources report Dino's proposals (replacing 'crime against honor' with 'violation of honor', modulating temporal effects), but don't inform whether the majority followed Toffoli or accepted the changes suggested by Dino
-
What specifically are items 5, 8, 9 and 10 of the thesis mentioned in the 60-day deadline?
Why it's still unknown: The reporting justice mentioned specific structural obligations, but no source details the content of these items from the original decision