In France, a young person commits suicide every two weeks following cyberbullying or school bullying. It was with this observation that the school year began, marked by the death of a teenager in Poissy. A few days later, videographer Manon Lanza received a wave of hate messages following her accident at the GP Explorer. Online hatred is becoming more and more palpable on social networks, facilitated by the possibility of hiding one’s true identity there. “It is high time that the impunity of social networks stops,” proclaimed the mother of Lindsay, another teenager who committed suicide, during a white march in June.
This Thursday, the first articles of the law “securing and regulating the digital space”, supported by MP Paul Midy, were discussed in the Assembly. “The objective is to fight against cyberharassment and reduce the level of violence on social networks,” recites a member of MP Renaissance’s entourage for 20 minutes. But the flagship measure of the text, which aims to link the physical identity of an Internet user to their digital identity, goes down badly with certain lawyers, who see it as a confusion between pseudonymity and anonymity.
“The parquet scoops the ocean with a Tupperware”
“Pseudonymity is an achievement that dates back to the Age of Enlightenment, it goes from Voltaire to Paul Bismuth,” jokes Alexandre Archambault, lawyer specializing in digital law, to 20 minutes. But “the pseudonym is not anonymity, in the press we can sign with another name and go back to the author because there is a chain of officials. On the Internet, it’s the same,” he says. Paul Midy’s entourage denies confusing the two notions but evokes “a feeling of anonymity which generates a feeling of impunity” among certain Internet users. The idea of the text amounts to “applying the rules of physical life to digital life: you do not have to put your name on your jacket in the street, but if the police stop you you must provide your identity”.
A principle that has its limits. “The ban on social networks can be transposed to removal measures, but it is a digital death sentence which does not speak its name and contravenes the freedom of access to information”, tackles Alexandre Archambault. Moreover, between IP address, telephone number or geolocation data, the means to find the author of an offense on the Internet already exist.
Cyberstalkers of Mila and the singer Hoshi were tried last year. But “between the facts and the conviction, 42 months passed, an eternity in digital matters which maintains the feeling of impunity”, points out Alexandre Archambault. “These are people who have the means to go through the entire legal procedure, to be supported,” agrees a close friend of Paul Midy, for whom digital identity should facilitate cases where “finding the author is complicated or even impossible ”, in the way that one would simply note “a license plate”. The lawyer, for his part, denounces a “French justice system in a state of homelessness”. Although a specialized prosecution service for online hatred has been set up, it only has “eight magistrates, there are more than a hundred Germans, there are 70 in the Netherlands”. “The parquet floor scoops the ocean with a Tupperware,” he pictures.
European blocking and self-censorship
“Today, it is much simpler to remove the anonymity of a telephone line than what we are proposing,” reassures the entourage of the Macronist deputy. What is proposed is “a three-stage rocket”. First, ensure that “80% have a digital identity by 2027”. Then, require “social networks to offer an identification tool by 2025”, then to “put in place certification for new registrants by 2027”. But it is not that simple. For everything relating to the Internet and digital technology, “there is a European regulation which applies without being transposed by national laws”, the DSA, notes lawyer Alexandre Archambault, which places social networks, mainly based in Ireland, outside the scope of French law. Through the voice of Thierry Breton, the European Commission has already announced that it is opposed to this text to avoid fragmenting European law, even if it means “using its coercive powers”.
But never mind. In the absence of easy control, the system proposed by Paul Midy must make it possible to “internalize the idea that when creating the account, we give our identity, which will create a form of self-regulation”. A psychological effect that Alexandre Archambault precisely denounces. “We are acculturating the population, which agrees to make increasingly secure laws,” he warns, also pointing out “minorities or whistleblowers who will self-censor.” Because even if the supporters of the SREN law defend themselves from any attack on freedom of expression, the French case could serve as an example for other countries.
“It’s not suspicious to want to protect your private life, only dictatorships think that,” continues Alexandre Archambault. Within the EU, only two countries want to create their own laws, like France: Poland and Hungary. “We want to bring the debate on anonymity to the European level” and “inspire Europe so that it legislates”, responds Paul Midy’s entourage. The risk is to inspire China or Iran in the process.