The National Court suspends the precautionary blocking of Telegram for being "excessive"

The judge annuls an order issued three days ago in which he ordered to provisionally block access to the application after verifying that the measure is “excessive and not proportional”

The National Court reverses and has agreed to annul the precautionary blockade of Telegram agreed three days ago after receiving a report from the Police, commissioned a few hours ago, in which it is concluded that the blockade would cause “clear damage to those millions of users” who use the platform legally, in addition to an “economic impact” for the companies and individuals who use it in their daily communication activity, according to a document to which EXPANSIÓN has had access.

Judge Santiago Pedraz has made this decision three days after issuing an order in which he ordered the main telecommunications operators in the country to block access to this social network after a complaint filed by the Producers’ Rights Management Entity. Audiovisuals (EGEDA) for sharing content protected by intellectual property rights. Groups such as Atresmedia, Mediaset, Movistar+, LaLiga and Mediapro are participating in the case.

In the order, the judge pointed out that the authorities of the British Virgin Islands (where Telegram’s headquarters are located) have not collaborated with the rogatory commission sent to Telegram to report certain data and identify the owners of the accounts used to the infringement.

Given the lack of information from the company, the judge agreed to suspend the service as a precautionary measure, as Egeda had requested in his complaint if Telegram refused to collaborate. This precautionary suspension had the support of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Now, Judge Pedraz is backing down after confirming that the measure “would be excessive and not proportional” due to the enormous impact it would have on the community of Telegram users. In the resolution, Pedraz explains that Telegram’s collaboration is necessary to advance the investigation and recalls that the Digital Services Law (DSA) and the Digital Market Law (DMA) require establishing “a point of contact for authorities and users.” to report criminal offences, an issue “to be resolved by the legislator and which will undoubtedly be done by European demand”.

“Telegram, like the rest of the large platforms, will necessarily have to respond for the point of contact in Europe to, as in the present case, require precise information,” concludes the judge.

One year of research

In the complaint filed by Egeda a year ago, to which EXPANSIÓN has had access, the entity denounces the “unknown owners” of a series of Telegram channels in which films, episodes of series are distributed (Cuéntame, Águila Roja, Acacias 38, There is no one who lives here… etc) and to Telegram itself, whose headquarters is located in the British Virgin Islands.

Egeda hired an external consultant to carry out an investigation that included “several requirements for the removal of content”, without obtaining a response to any of them.

“Telegram as a service provider is not neutral, because after having effective knowledge of the illegal activity carried out through the channels created ad hoc in its system, it ignores the requests sent,” the letter states, recalling that “it will be responsible of the infringement who, having reasonable evidence to know of an infringing activity, such as in this case Telegram, does not act to prevent it”.

SOURCE