MKB Juristen drafts custom legal documents
It is best not to cobble together or copy important contracts, terms and conditions, and other legal documents yourself. We help entrepreneurs on a budget with customized legal solutions, clear costs upfront, and practical explanations.
- Custom contracts, terms and conditions, and legal documents
- Budget-friendly and clear about the costs upfront
- Request a free consultation or a no-obligation quote
A platform may take action against unwanted content, but must clearly state in its terms of use what is and is not allowed — and, when intervening, explain concretely what the problem is. LinkedIn blocked the profile of an MP due to coronavirus misinformation, but had to reinstate it because the terms were too vague. Clear terms of use are therefore essential.
LinkedIn blocked MP Van Haga's profile twice within a year for spreading coronavirus misinformation. After the first objection, the profile was restored; the second time, it remained permanently offline, after which Van Haga took the matter to court. The ruling shows how important good terms of use are.
Platforms may take action against misinformation
LinkedIn stated that it wanted to combat coronavirus misinformation as much as possible, even if it is not contrary to the law, because it can be dangerous. In its assessment, it relied on information from health authorities such as the WHO. The court (ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2021:8539) acknowledges that it is important for the public to be well informed and that platforms may take action against misinformation, and endorses the choice to rely on authoritative, politically neutral bodies that prioritize public health.
The terms of use were too vague
However, the judge saw a problem: LinkedIn had barely written out the policy. The terms merely stated that users may not share content that “completely contradicts guidelines of leading global health organizations and government public health institutions.” According to the judge, it is insufficiently clear where the line lies between critical remarks and posts that completely contradict them. Moreover, LinkedIn had not explained the substance of the problem with the posts, but had only referred to the terms. Therefore, the profile had to be reinstated.
LinkedIn was proven right on one point: nine posts did not have to be removed because they did contain harmful misinformation (such as claiming that corona is no worse than the flu or that vaccines are “experimental drugs”). LinkedIn was not required to publish a correction.
Good terms of use are crucial
The case demonstrates that websites need good terms of use: these determine what is and is not allowed and how you can intervene. That importance was also evident in an earlier case involving Marktplaats, in which Marktplaats was not required to disclose personal data because the terms clearly stated that bids are not binding.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a platform allowed to delete a profile or post?
Yes, based on its terms of use and within the law. However, the terms must clearly state what is prohibited, and when intervening, the platform must concretely explain what the problem is.
Why did LinkedIn have to reinstate the profile?
Because the terms of use were too vague regarding the line between criticism and misinformation, and LinkedIn had not explained substantively what was wrong with the posts.
Why are clear terms of use important?
They determine what is permitted and how you can intervene or refuse. Vague conditions make enforcement challengeable, as this case shows.
Have good terms of use drafted
The legal experts at MKB Juristen draft clear terms of use that protect your platform or website. View our expertise in contract law or contact us.
