As its title suggests, the Commission's public consultation on the regulatory environment for platforms, online intermediaries, data and cloud computing and the collaborative economy covers a lot of different areas. One of these is the rules for on-line intermediaries: at present networks, caches and hosts that carry third party content.

In Ancient Greece the oracle at Delphi was notorious for speaking in riddles. The European Human Rights Court’s judgement in Delfi v Estonia is similarly puzzling.

Next month I'll be going to an academic conference on Google Spain and the "Right to be Forgotten" (actually, "right to be delinked") so I thought I'd better organise my thoughts on why, as a provider and user of communications and information services, the decision worries me. And I am much more worried by the decision itself and the train of proposed law it seems to have created than by how Google has responded.

Implementation of the new provisions for website operators under the Defamation Act 2013 has come a step closer, with the Ministry of Justice seeking comments on draft implementing Regulations. INFORRM has a summary of the process, with a helpful flowchart.

The passing of the Defamation Act 2013 this week removes a couple of areas of legal uncertainty if you run a website, blog, etc. and someone else posts an article or comment that may be defamatory. First, provided you aren’t acting maliciously, you don’t risk liability merely by moderating what is posted. Second, the Act tries to ensure that defamation claims are settled either between the author and the person allegedly defamed, or by the courts.