There is medium internet censorship in France, including limited filtering of child pornography, laws against websites that promote terrorism or racial hatred, and attempts to protect copyright. The "Freedom on the Net" report by Freedom House has consistently listed France as a country with Internet freedom. Its global ranking was 6 in 2013 and 12 in 2017."Freedom on the Net 2013 - France", Jean-Loup Richet, Freedom House, October 2013 A sharp decline in its score, second only to Libya was noted in 2015 and attributed to "problematic policies adopted in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack, such as restrictions on content that could be seen as 'apology for terrorism,' prosecutions of users, and significantly increased surveillance."
Overview France continues to promote freedom of the press and speech online by allowing unfiltered access to most content, apart from limited filtering of child pornography and web sites that promote terrorism, or racial violence and hatred. The French government has undertaken numerous measures to protect the rights of Internet users, including the passage of the (LCEN, Law for Trust in the Digital Economy) in 2004. However, the passage of a new copyright law threatening to ban users from the Internet upon their third violation has drawn much criticism from privacy advocates as well as the European Union (EU) parliament.
In November 2010, France was classified by the OpenNet Initiative as showing no evidence of Internet filtering in any of the four areas monitored (political, social, conflict/security, and Internet tools)"ONI Country Profile: France", OpenNet Initiative, 26 November 2010
However, with the implementation of the "three-strikes" legislation and a law providing for the administrative filtering of the web and the defense of a "civilized" Internet, 2010 was a difficult year for Internet freedom in France. The offices of several online media firms and their journalists were targeted for break-ins and court summons and pressured to identify their sources. As a result, France has been added to Reporters Without Borders list of "Countries Under Surveillance"."Countries under surveillance: France" , Reporters Without Borders, March 2011
As of 2013, controversial clauses within the HADOPI, LOPPSI 2, and LCEN laws were provoking the ire of Internet advocates in the country, mainly over fears of disproportionate punishments for copyright violators, overreaching administrative censorship, and threats to privacy. However, Freedom House ranks France amongst the top 12 countries for Internet freedom.
LICRA vs. Yahoo In 2000, French courts demanded Yahoo! block Nazi material in the case LICRA vs. Yahoo."Yahoo! loses Nazi auction case" , CNN.com, 20 November 2000 In 2001, a U.S. District Court Judge held that Yahoo cannot be forced to comply with French laws against the expression of pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic views, because doing so would violate its right to free expression under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution."Judge Dismisses French Case Against Yahoo" , Stephen Lawson, IDG News, PCWorld, 9 November 2001 In 2006, a U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the District Court, finding either a lack of jurisdiction or an inability to enforce its order in France"9th Circuit En Banc Panel Rules Against Yahoo in French Internet Censorship Case", Tech Law Journal, 12 January 2006 and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider an appeal."Supreme Court won't hear Yahoo! Nazi auctions case", Out-Law.com from the international law firm Pinsent Masons, 31 May 2006
Hadopi laws The Hadopi law, enacted in 2009, allows disconnecting from the Internet users that have been caught illegally downloading copyrighted content, or failing to secure their system against such illegal downloads; as of August 2009, this law is to be supplemented by a Hadopi2 law. The law, brought before Parliament in 2009, will authorize a blacklist of sites providing child pornography, established by the Ministry of the Interior, which Internet service providers will have to block. The Loppsi "Bill on direction and planning for the performance of domestic security" is a far-reaching security bill that seeks to modernise Internet laws, criminalising online identity theft, allowing police to tap Internet connections as well as phone lines during investigations and targeting child pornography by ordering ISPs to filter Internet connections.
In 2010, French parliament opposed all the amendments seeking to minimise the use of filtering Internet sites. This move has stirred controversy throughout French society, as the Internet filtering intended to catch child pornographers could also be extended to censor other material.
Critics also warn that filtering URLs will have no effect, as distributors of child pornography and other materials are already using encrypted peer-to-peer systems to deliver their wares.
In 2011 the Constitutional Council of France validated Article 4 of the LOPPSI 2 law, thereby allowing filtering the Internet without any justice decision."French Constitutional Council Validates Internet Censorship" , 10 March 2011, La Quadrature du Net, Paris"Le filtrage administratif des sites pédophiles autorisé (The administrative filtering of the sites paedophiles authorized)", Emmanuel Berretta, Le Point.fr, 3 March 2011"Loppsi 2 : les "sages" valident le blocage des sites pédo-pornographiques (Loppsi 2: "sages" validate the blocking of the child pornography sites)", LeMonde.fr, 11 March 2011 The filtered sites blacklist being under the control of an administrative authority depending directly from the Ministry of the Interior without any independent monitoring.
On 21 April 2011, the Hadopi announced they planned integrating a spyware called "securization software" in the French Internet Service Providers provided modem-routers with the explicit goal of tracking any communication including private correspondence and instant messengers exchanges."Hadopi : la sécurisation pourrait pénétrer la box (Hadopi: the security could penetrate the box)", GNT Media, 21 April 2011"Filtrage dans les box ADSL et atteinte à la vie privée au programme de l'Hadopi (Filtering in the boxes ADSL and invasion of privacy with the program of l'Hadopi)", Guillaume Champeau, Numerama Magazine, 20 April 2011"Moyens de sécurisation : la Hadopi lance une nouvelle consultation (Means of security: Hadopi launches a new consultation)", Christophe Auffray, ZDNet France, 20 April 2011
June 2011: Draft executive order implementing the Law for Trust in the Digital Economy
A June 2011 draft executive order implementing Article 18 "Article 18, Loi n°2004-575 du 21 juin 2004 pour la confiance dans l'économie numérique, modifié par Loi n°2007-297 du 5 mars 2007", version consolidée au 19 mai 2011 ("Act No. 2004-575 of 21 June 2004 on confidence in the digital economy, amended by Act No. 2007-297 of March 5, 2007", consolidated version 19 May 2011) of the Law for Trust in the Digital Economy (LCEN) would give several French government ministriesThe Ministries of Defense, of Justice, of the Interior, of the Economy, of Communication, of Health, of the Digital Economy, and the National Authority for the Defense of Information Systems the power to restrict online content "in case of violation, or where there is a serious risk of violation, of the maintenance of public order, the protection of minors, the protection of public health, the preservation of interests of the national defense, or the protection of physical persons.""French Government Plans to Extend Internet Censorship", Simon Columbus, OpenNet Initiative, 21 June 2011 According to Félix Tréguer, a Policy and Legal Analyst for the digital rights advocacy group La Quadrature du Net, this is "a censorship power over the Internet that is probably unrivaled in the democratic world.""France on its way to total Internet censorship?", Félix Tréguer, Index on Censorship, 27 June 2011 In response to criticism, on 23 June 2011 the minister for the Industry and the Digital economy, Éric Besson, announced that the Government would rewrite the order, possibly calling for a judge to review the legality of the content and the proportionality of the measures to be taken. Any executive order has to be approved by the French Council of State, which will have to decide whether Internet censorship authorization can be extended to such an extent by a mere executive order. In 2013, the Parliament eventually repealed the legislative provision on which the decree was based.Le filtrage administratif du web supprimé par l'Assemblée (in French), 28 June 2013, Numerama.
October 2011: Cop-watching site blocked
On 14 October 2011 a French court ordered French Internet service providers to block the Copwatch Nord Paris I-D-F website. Copwatch Nord-Paris I-D-F, website, accessed 17 October 2011 The website shows pictures and videos of police officers arresting suspects, taunting protesters and allegedly committing acts of violence against members of ethnic minorities. The police said they were particularly concerned about portions of the site showing identifiable photos of police officers, along with personal data, that could lead to violence against the local authorities. However, free speech advocates reacted with alarm. "This court order illustrates an obvious will by the French government to control and censor citizens’ new online public sphere," said Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesman for La Quadrature du Net, a Paris-based organization that campaigns against restrictions on the Internet."Court Orders French Cop-Watching Site Blocked" , Eric Pfanner, Herald-Tribune, 16 October 2011
Twitter case Following the posting of an antisemitic and racists posts by anonymous users, Twitter removed those posts from its service. Lawsuits were filed by the Union of Jewish Students (UEJF), a French advocacy group and, on 24 January 2013, Judge Anne-Marie Sauteraud ordered Twitter to divulge the Personally identifiable information about the user who posted the antisemitic post, charging that the posts violated French laws against hate speech. Twitter responded by saying that it was "reviewing its options" regarding the French charges. Twitter was given two weeks to comply with the court order before daily fines of €1,000 (about US$1,300) would be assessed. Issues over jurisdiction arise, because Twitter has no offices nor employees within France, so it is unclear how a French court could sanction Twitter.
Pierre-sur-Haute article deletion