2016 Natalie Alkiviadou 216 3 Regulating Internet Hate A Flying Pig? by Natalie Alkiviadou* © 2016 Natalie Alkiviadou Everybody may disseminate this article by electronic means and make it available for download under the terms and conditions of the Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL). A copy of the license text may be obtained at http://nbn-resolving. de/urn:nbn:de:0009-dppl-v3-en8. Recommended citation: Natalie Alkiviadou, Regulating Internet Hate: A Flying Pig?, 7 (2016) JIPITEC 216 para 1. Keywords: Internet hate; regulation; hate speech; Cybercrime Convention; freedom of expression tion, the paper seeks to provide an overview of the current state of affairs in the realm of regulating hate but also to demonstrate that such regulation, as oc- curring to date, is dysfunctional, predominantly due to the vast divergence of US-European approaches to the issues of free expression both on and off line. It is argued that due to the very nature of the inter- net as a borderless and global entity, this normative divergence cannot be overcome so long as traditional approaches to the issue of regulation continue to be taken. The paper’s analysis will emanate from the premise that there exists a need to strike an equi- table balance between the freedom of expression on the one hand and the freedom from discrimination on the other. Abstract: This paper will assess the regula- tion of the internet in the ambit of hate speech ex- pressed digitally through the internet. To do so, it will provide a definitional framework of hate speech, an overview of the internet’s role in the ambit of hate speech and consider the challenges in legally regu- lating online hate speech through a discussion of rel- evant case-law as well as the Additional Protocol to the Cybercrime Convention. The jurisprudential anal- ysis will allow for a comparison of the stances ad- opted by the ECtHR and national courts of European countries on the one hand, and courts of the United States on the other, in the sphere under consider- ation. By looking at regional and national case-law and the initiative of the Council of Europe in the form of the Additional Protocol to the Cybercrime Conven- A. Introduction 1 The internet is one of the most powerful contemporary tools used by individuals and groups to express ideas and opinions and receive and impart information. 1 It “magniies the voice and multiplies the information within reach of everyone who has 1 The number of Internet users for 2015 was 3,185,996,155: <http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users/> [Accessed 28 th June 2016]. access to it.” 2 Notwithstanding the positive aspects of this development in the realm of free speech and the exchange of ideas, the internet also provides a platform for the promotion and dissemination of hate. 3 In fact, the internet has seen a sharp rise in the number of extreme-right websites and 2 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, David Kaye (22 May 2015) A/HRC/29/32, para 11. 3 Fernne Brennan, ‘Legislating against Internet Race Hate’ (2009) 18 Information and Communications Technology Law 2, 123.