Social media and the law 社交媒体和法律

Accounting for algorithms

Is Facebook liable for pogroms against Rohingyas in Myanmar?

第一段：

THAT FACEBOOK was used to spread rhetoric that incited carnage in Myanmar is hardly up for debate. According to the lead author of a UN report published in 2018 the firm’s platform played a “determining role” in the violence inflicted on Rohingya Muslims by marauding Buddhists. Facebook acknowledges that it did not do enough to prevent its services from being abused. But whether it is liable for what happened is a trickier question.

脸书被用于传播煽动缅甸大屠杀的言论，这点几乎无可争议。在2018年发表的一份联合国报告中，其主要作者指出，在佛教徒对罗兴亚穆斯林的暴力洗劫行为中，脸书平台起到了“关键作用”。脸书也承认在防止其服务被滥用方面做得不够。但它是否应对所发生的事件负责，则是一个更复杂的问题。

第二段：

It may soon be answered. A legal campaign is under way on both sides of the Atlantic. It claims that Facebook, now renamed Meta, should be held liable for allowing users to spread such content during the Rohingya genocide. A letter delivered to Facebook’s London offices on December 6th gave the firm notice of intent to sue it in the High Court. That suit will be on behalf of Rohingyas living everywhere in the world outside America, including Bangladesh, where 1m or so dwell as refugees.

也许这个问题很快就能得到解答。一项法律战正在大西洋两侧同时展开。诉讼提出，脸书（现已更名Meta）应为在罗兴亚种族灭绝期间允许用户传播这类内容而负责。12月6日，脸书伦敦办事处收到了一封通知函，将代表居住在除美国外的所有罗兴亚人，包括暂居在孟加拉国的约1百万罗兴亚难民，向最高法院提出诉讼。

第三段：

The American complaint, filed on the same day in California, is a class action on behalf of Rohingyas living in America. It is seeking “at least” $150bn in compensation for “wrongful death, personal injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress and loss of property”. Although American internet companies typically are shielded from liability for content that is disseminated through their platforms, the suit argues that the court must apply Burmese law for harms done in Myanmar. American courts can theoretically apply foreign laws in this way, though there is little precedent for it.

同一天在加利福尼亚，代表居住在美国的罗兴亚人，也递交了诉讼书，要求脸书为造成“非正常死亡、人身伤害、痛苦与苦难、精神损害以及财产丧失”赔偿“至少”1500亿美元。尽管通常来说，美国互联网公司无需对通过其平台所传播的内容负责，但诉讼方认为，对在缅甸造成的伤害，法院必须采用缅甸法律。虽然几乎没有先例，但理论上说，在这种情况下美国法院可以应用外国法律。

第四段：

Meta did not comment on the lawsuit when asked, but said that it was “appalled by the crimes committed against the Rohingya people”. It added that it has improved its capacity to moderate Burmese content.

Meta对此未做回应，但表示“针对罗兴亚人犯下的罪行感到震惊”，并补充说已提高了缅甸版内容的审核能力。

第五段：

The allegations fall into two categories. The first is that since 2010 Facebook failed actively and effectively to moderate content on its network that was contributing to the incitement of genocide in Myanmar, despite being aware of what was happening. The second is that Facebook’s own content-recommendation algorithms amplified the spread of this content. (Meta has been approached for comment.)

指控分为两类。第一，自2010年以来，尽管完全清楚当时事态，脸书却没能积极有效地审核自己网络上助长在缅甸实施种族灭绝的内容。第二，脸书自己的内容推荐算法助长了这类内容的传播。（已联系Meta要求做出评论）

第六段：

No precedent exists for such a case, at least when it comes to social-media companies. One distant parallel is with Radio Mille Collines, a Rwandan radio station that was instrumental in inciting the Rwandan genocide of 1994, in which perhaps 500,000 people, mostly Tutsis, were killed. Some of those who ran the station were convicted of incitement to genocide. The difference is that that was Radio Mille Collines’s main purpose. (Its former chairman is also accused of financing the import of machetes.) International courts went after those who urged the killing, not the manufacturers of the radio equipment.

至少在涉及社交媒体公司时，这类案件没有先例。稍微有些类似的是米勒·科林斯电台。1994年在卢旺达，约50万人，其中主要是图西人，惨遭杀害。这家卢旺达电台在这场种族灭绝中发挥了关键作用。部分电台经营者被判处种族灭绝煽动罪。与此次案件不同，米勒·科林斯电台的主要目的就是煽动种族灭绝。（其前主席还被指控为进口砍刀提供资金。）国际法庭惩罚的是教唆谋杀者，而非电台设备制造商。

第七段：

The current lawsuits argue that Facebook is both manufacturer and, to some extent, messenger: its algorithms decide what people see. Whether and how the firm is liable for what its algorithms do will now be tested.

本次诉讼认为，脸书既是制造商，在某种程度上也是传信人：脸书的算法决定人们所看到的内容。公司是否该为自己的算法负责，怎么负责，现在将面临考验。