Responsabilidade civil do Instagram na desativação unilateral de contas de influenciadores digitais
The unilateral deactivation of user accounts carried out by the social network Instagram, temporarily or permanently, causes extreme damage to those who perform their work from the aforementioned platform, as is the case of content creators, bloggers or digital influencers. This suspension occurs fr...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | bachelorThesis |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/49029 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | The unilateral deactivation of user accounts carried out by the social network Instagram, temporarily or permanently, causes extreme damage to those who perform their work from the aforementioned platform, as is the case of content creators, bloggers or digital influencers. This suspension occurs from the fact that the network itself identifies the violation of its guidelines and terms of use or from complaints from the community itself. In order to elucidate consumer protection in this situation, this work aims to identify how Instagram is civilly liable for the damages caused, in the case of the unilateral deactivation of digital influencer accounts without justification, prior notice or prior notification, with no chance of defense or contradictory. To this end, the work sets out to characterize the company Instagram, the digital influencers and what is the legal relationship between them, the horizontal effect of fundamental rights applied to the case and what is the civil liability of the company in the resulting damages. The research was carried out with an exploratory purpose, in a qualitative approach and by the deductive method, using literature review and document analysis. In this way, it was possible to conclude that Instagram's civil liability for the case is objective. It was also possible to identify that the platform limits, in a purposeful way, the right to information and to the contradictory of its users, which is characterized as an illicit attitude and causes its accountability. |
|---|