Clipping of news on Brazilian Culture, Law and Citizenship
08/07/2012
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
The Third Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) found that Microsoft should not be held responsible for transmission of messages deemed offensive to the moral user, and the impossibility of identifying the sender of the message does not constitute defects in the provision of e-mail service called Hotmail.
The case began with action for damages brought by users against Microsoft Informática Ltda., Claiming to have been the target of insults conveyed in an email sent to others through e-mail service Hotmail.
There was the prior filing of injunctive relief in order to identify the person responsible for defamatory messages and block it. The court granted an injunction in a precautionary measure.
No flaw
The judgment dismissed the application, understanding that there was no flaw in the service provided by Microsoft, the exclusive fault of the user's mail. Applications of the injunction were upheld, with the exception that all court orders were, to the extent possible, addressed by Microsoft.
You appealed but the Court of Rio Grande do Sul confirmed the sentence, meaning that Microsoft can not be held liable for the defamatory e-mail sent by malicious third, unless you were refusing to identify him, the did not occur.
In the Supreme Court, the Minister Nancy Andrighi, rapporteur of the case, said that the prior inspection, by e-mail provider, the content of messages sent by each user activity is not intrinsic to the service, so that it can not be the site deems defective that does not examine and filter the data and images sent.
"The material damage caused by messages with offensive content, submitted by the user via e-mail is not a risk inherent to the e-mail providers, so that they do not apply to strict liability under Article 927, paragraph one, the Civil Code, "said Andrighi.
Inability to identify
According to the minister, however to say that a site is secure, the internet will always be subject to hacking, which invariably get around the barriers that manage access to data.
Thus, the inability to identify the person responsible for sending the offending message is not characterized necessarily defect in the service ombudsman e-mail and can not be taken as legitimate expectations of the victim, as a consumer, that security imputed this service would imply the existence of means to individualize all users who forward every day millions of emails.
"While not requiring or recording the personal data of users of Hotmail, Microsoft maintains a sufficiently effective way of tracking those users that can locate your ISP (yes this resources to, in theory, identify the user's IP) , a security measure that corresponds to the average expected care provider's mail, "concluded the minister.
The decision of the Third Class was unanimous.
Source: Superior Court of Justice
Our news are taken in full of our partner sites. For this reason, we can not change the content of these up in case of typing errors.
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.