@online{Fahy2020,
title = {Journalist and editor’s conviction for incitement to religious hatred violated Article 10},
author = {Fahy, R. and Voorhoof, D.},
url = {http://www.mediareport.nl/persrecht/21012020/journalist-and-editors-conviction-for-incitement-to-religious-hatred-violated-article-10/},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-23},
journal = {Media Report},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}

@article{Dobber2020,
title = {The regulation of online political micro-targeting in Europe},
author = {Dobber, T. and Fahy, R. and Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},
url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/regulation-online-political-micro-targeting-europe},
doi = {10.14763/2019.4.1440},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-16},
journal = {Internet Policy Review},
volume = {8},
number = {4},
abstract = {In this paper, we examine how online political micro-targeting is regulated in Europe. While there are no specific rules on such micro-targeting, there are general rules that apply. We focus on three fields of law: data protection law, freedom of expression, and sector-specific rules for political advertising; for the latter we examine four countries. We argue that the rules in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) are necessary, but not sufficient. We show that political advertising, including online political micro-targeting, is protected by the right to freedom of expression. That right is not absolute, however. From a European human rights perspective, it is possible for lawmakers to limit the possibilities for political advertising. Indeed, some countries ban TV advertising for political parties during elections.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Fahy2019eb,
title = {European Regulation of Smartphone Ecosystems},
author = {Fahy, R. and van Hoboken, J.},
url = {https://edpl.lexxion.eu/article/EDPL/2019/4/6},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.21552/edpl/2019/4/6},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-12-13},
journal = {European Data Protection Law Review (EDPL)},
volume = {5},
number = {4},
pages = {476-491},
abstract = {For the first time, two pieces of EU legislation will specifically target smartphone ecosystems in relation to smartphone and mobile software (eg, iOS and Android) privacy, and use and monetisation of data. And yet, both pieces of legislation approach data use and data monetisation from radically contrasting perspectives. The first is the proposed ePrivacy Regulation, which seeks to provide enhanced protection against user data monitoring and tracking in smartphones, and safeguard privacy in electronic communications. On the other hand, the recently enacted Platform-to-Business Regulation 2019, seeks to bring fairness to platform-business user relations (including app stores and app developers), and is crucially built upon the premise that the ability to access and use data, including personal data, can enable important value creation in the online platform economy. This article discusses how these two Regulations will apply to smartphone ecosystems, especially relating to user and device privacy. The article analyses the potential tension points between the two sets of rules, which result from the underlying policy objectives of safeguarding privacy in electronic communications and the functioning of the digital economy in the emerging era of platform governance. The article concludes with a discussion on how to address these issues, at the intersection of privacy and competition in the digital platform economy.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Voorhoof2019,
title = {Denying journalist access to asylum-seeker ‘reception centre’ in Hungary violated Article 10 ECHR},
author = {Voorhoof, D. and Fahy, R.},
url = {https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/11/04/denying-journalist-access-to-asylum-seeker-reception-centre-in-hungary-violated-article-10-echr/},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-11-15},
journal = {Strasbourg Observers},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@techreport{vanHoboken2019c,
title = {De verspreiding van desinformatie via internetdiensten en de regulering van politieke advertenties},
author = {van Hoboken, J. and Appelman, N. and Fahy, R. and Leerssen, P. and McGonagle, T. and van Eijk, N. and Helberger, N.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/verspreiding_desinformatie_internetdiensten_tussenrapportage.pdf},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-10-31},
abstract = {Rapport in opdracht van het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties, bijlage bij Kamerstuk 2019-2020, 30821, nr. 91, Tweede Kamer.},
note = {Tussenrapportage oktober 2019},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@article{Fahy2019c,
title = {ECtHR engages in dangerous "triple pirouette" to find criminal prosecution for media coverage of PKK statements did not violate Article 10},
author = {Fahy, R. and Voorhoof, D.},
url = {https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/10/14/ecthr-engages-in-dangerous-triple-pirouette-to-find-criminal-prosecution-for-media-coverage-of-pkk-statements-did-not-violate-article-10/#more-4435},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-10-14},
journal = {Strasbourg Observers},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@techreport{Irion2019b,
title = {The independence of media regulatory authorities in Europe},
author = {Irion, K. and Delinavelli, G. and Coutinho, M.F. and Fahy, R. and Jusi\'{c}, T. and Klimkiewicz, B. and Llorens, C. and Rozgonyi, K. and Svensson, S. and Kersevan Smokvina, T. and Til, G. van},
editor = {Capello, M.},
url = {https://rm.coe.int/the-independence-of-media-regulatory-authorities-in-europe/168097e504},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-10-01},
publisher = {European Audiovisual Observatory},
note = {Capello, M. (ed.), IRIS Special 2019-1, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@article{Fahy2019bb,
title = {Article 10 ECHR and Expressive Conduct},
author = {Fahy, R. and Voorhoof, D.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Communications_Law_2019.pdf},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-06-25},
journal = {Communications Law},
volume = {24},
number = {2},
pages = {62-73},
abstract = {The European Court of Human Rights has recently delivered a series of judgments finding violations of the right to freedom of expression over convictions for engaging in expressive conduct. The purpose of this article is to discuss the European Court's recent case law on expressive conduct under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and in particular to assess in what circumstances, if any, domestic courts may impose prison sentences, even if suspended, on individuals engaging in peaceful, but provocative and offensive expression.},
note = {Pre-print},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Fahy2019b,
title = {The Chilling Effect of Turkey’s Article 301 Insult Law},
author = {Fahy, R.},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-06-14},
journal = {European Human Rights Law Review },
volume = {2019},
number = {3},
pages = {298-308},
abstract = {This article discusses how the approach of the European Court of Human Rights has evolved in seeking to protect freedom of expression from the chilling effect of Turkey’s controversial Article 301 insult law. The article reveals the early reluctance within the Court in finding that the law’s provisions were incompatible with freedom of expression, and yet, the analysis now demonstrates how the Court’s concern for the chilling effect has led the Court to two adopt notable approaches: first, the Court permitting applicants to argue that the law, in and of itself, violates the European Convention on Human Rights, even where an applicant has not been convicted, nor even prosecuted under the law; and second, the Court’s application of its rarely-used competence under Article 46 of the European Convention, finding that amending Article 301 would “constitute an appropriate form of execution” of the Court’s judgment.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Borgesius2019b,
title = {Online politieke microtargeting: Een zegen of een vloek voor de democratie?},
author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and M\"{o}ller, J. and Dobber, T. and Kruikemeier, S. and Irion, K. and Stapel, S. and Fahy, R. and Bod\'{o}, B. and Vreese, C.H. de},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/NJB_2019.pdf},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-03-19},
journal = {Nederlands Juristenblad (NJB)},
volume = {2019},
number = {10},
pages = {528-669},
abstract = {Voor online politieke microtargeting wordt het online-gedrag van mensen in kaart gebracht en worden de verzamelde gegevens gebruikt om mensen gerichte politieke advertenties te tonen. Microtargeting is vanuit de VS komen overwaaien naar Europa en heeft voor- en nadelen voor de democratie. Microtargeting kan politieke partijen helpen om mensen effectief te bereiken en kan politieke betrokkenheid stimuleren. Maar microtargeting kan ook een bedreiging vormen voor de democratie. Zo kan een politieke partij zich verschillend voordoen aan verschillende mensen. Bovendien bedreigt het verzamelen van persoonsgegevens onze privacy. Dit artikel brengt de beloftes en bedreigingen van microtargeting voor de democratie in kaart en schetst mogelijkheden voor beleidsmakers om het gebruik van microtargeting te reguleren.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Fahy2019e,
title = {Mobile Privacy and Business-to-Platform Dependencies: An Analysis of SEC Disclosures},
author = {Fahy, R. and van Hoboken, J. and van Eijk, N.},
url = {https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/jbtl/vol14/iss1/4/},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-02-06},
journal = {Journal of Business & Technology Law },
volume = {14},
number = {1},
abstract = {This Article systematically examines the dependence of mobile apps on mobile platforms for the collection and use of personal information through an analysis of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings of mobile app companies. The Article uses these disclosures to find systematic evidence of how app business models are shaped by the governance of user data by mobile platforms, in order to reflect on the role of platforms in privacy regulation more generally. The analysis of SEC filings documented in the Article produces new and unique insights into the data practices and data-related aspects of the business models of popular mobile apps and shows the value of SEC filings for privacy law and policy research more generally. The discussion of SEC filings and privacy builds on regulatory developments in SEC disclosures and cybersecurity of the last decade. The Article also connects to recent regulatory developments in the U.S. and Europe, including the General Data Protection Regulation, the proposals for a new ePrivacy Regulation and a Regulation of fairness in business-to-platform relations.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@techreport{Al\'{e}n-Savikko2018,
title = {Media reporting: facts, nothing but facts?},
author = {Al\'{e}n-Savikko, A. and Apa, E. and Bassini, M. and Cabrera Bl\'{a}zquez, F.J. and Cunningham, I. and Etteldorf, C. and Granchet, A. and Klimkiewicz, B. and Fahy, R. and Pol\'{a}k, J. and Prosser, T. and Richter, A. and Rodriguez, N.},
url = {https://rm.coe.int/media-reporting-facts-nothing-but-facts/16808e3cda},
isbn = {9789287188618},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-10-24},
abstract = {Separating the facts from the fiction in today’s media is becoming mission impossible. In the era of the #fakenews hashtag, the internet, and the media in general, are concerned by the emergence of fiction which is sometimes much stranger than truth! So what rules and initiatives exist in Europe to help ensure the accuracy and objectivity of news and current affairs reporting? How far can the European and the various national legislators go to protect us from dubious reporting or at least ensure that codes of good conduct exist?},
note = {IRIS Special, European Audiovisual Observatory: Strasbourg, 2018, 150 pp.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@article{Nooren2018,
title = {Should We Regulate Digital Platforms? A New Framework for Evaluating Policy Options},
author = {Nooren, P. and Gorp, N. van and van Eijk, N. and Fahy, R.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Policy_and_Internet_2018.pdf},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.177},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-09-11},
journal = {Policy & Internet},
volume = {2018},
pages = {264-301},
abstract = {The economic and societal impact of digital platforms raises a number of questions for policymakers, including whether existing regulatory approaches and instruments are sufficient to promote and safeguard public interests. This article develops a practical framework that provides structure and guidance to policymakers who design policies for the digital economy. The framework differs from other approaches in taking the digital business models of platforms as the starting point for the analysis. The framework consists of three pillars, namely determining a platform's characteristics, relating these to public interests, and formulating policy options. The framework then invokes a return‐path analysis for assessing how the interventions affect the business model, whether it has the desired effect on public interests, and ensuring it has no undesired side‐effects on public interests. The framework puts forward two key messages for current discussions on digital platforms. First, one should look at the underlying characteristics of platforms rather than trying to understand digital platforms as a single category. Second, policymakers should explore existing rules and policy options, as they seem fit to deal with several characteristics of digital platforms in a time frame that matches the rapid development of platform technologies and business models.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@techreport{McGonagle2018c,
title = {Open Journalism: The Road Travelled and the Road Ahead},
author = {McGonagle, T. and Fahy, R. and Kosti\'{c}, B. and Klus, M. and Plaizier, C. and Hanhart, M.},
url = {https://www.osce.org/representative-on-freedom-of-media/384432?download=true},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-06-22},
note = {Vienna, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, 2018.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@article{Borgesius2018,
title = {Online Political Microtargeting: Promises and Threats for Democracy},
author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and M\"{o}ller, J. and Kruikemeier, S. and Fahy, R. and Irion, K. and Dobber, T. and Bod\'{o}, B. and Vreese, C.H. de},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/UtrechtLawReview.pdf},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-02-13},
journal = {Utrecht Law Review},
volume = {14},
number = {1},
pages = {82-96},
abstract = {Online political microtargeting involves monitoring people’s online behaviour, and using the collected data, sometimes enriched with other data, to show people-targeted political advertisements. Online political microtargeting is widely used in the US; Europe may not be far behind. This paper maps microtargeting’s promises and threats to democracy. For example, microtargeting promises to optimise the match between the electorate’s concerns and political campaigns, and to boost campaign engagement and political participation. But online microtargeting could also threaten democracy. For instance, a political party could, misleadingly, present itself as a different one-issue party to different individuals. And data collection for microtargeting raises privacy concerns. We sketch possibilities for policymakers if they seek to regulate online political microtargeting. We discuss which measures would be possible, while complying with the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@techreport{Fahy2017b,
title = {Media coverage of elections: the legal framework in Europe},
author = {Fahy, R. and Apa, E. and Bassini, M. and Bruna, A. and Cabrera Bl\'{a}zquez, F. and Cunningham, I. and Etteldorf, C. and Goldberg, D. and Granchet, A. and Klimkiewicz, B. and Richter, A. and Rozendaal, M.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IRIS_Special_2017_1.pdf},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-09-14},
note = {IRIS Special, 2017-1, European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg, ISBN: 9789287184870},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@article{Fahy2017b,
title = {Annotatie bij Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens 21 februari 2017 (Dosamantes / Spanje)},
author = {Fahy, R.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EHRC_2017_7.pdf},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-08-24},
journal = {European Human Right Cases},
volume = {2017},
number = {7},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@article{Fahy2017b,
title = {The Chilling Effect of Liability for Online Reader Comments},
author = {Fahy, R.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EHRLR_2017_4.pdf},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-08-24},
journal = {European Human Rights Law Review},
volume = {2017},
number = {4},
pages = {387-393},
abstract = {This article assesses how the European Court of Human Rights has responded to the argument that holding online news media liable for reader comments has a chilling effect on freedom of expression. The article demonstrates how the Court first responded by dismissing the argument, and focused on the apparent lack of evidence for any such chilling effect. The article then argues that the Court has moved away from its initial rejection, and now accepts that a potential chilling effect, even without evidence, is integral to deciding whether online news media should be liable for reader comments. Finally, the article argues that this latter view is consistent with the Court’s precedent in other areas of
freedom of expression law where a similar chilling effect may also arise.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@misc{Borgesius2017b,
title = {An Assessment of the Commission's Proposal on Privacy and Electronic Communications},
author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. and van Hoboken, J. and Fahy, R. and Irion, K. and Rozendaal, M.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IPOL_STU2017583152_EN.pdf},
doi = {10.2861/614076},
isbn = {9789284611010},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-06-15},
abstract = {This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee, appraises the European Commission’s proposal for an ePrivacy Regulation. The study assesses whether the proposal would ensure that the right to the protection of personal data, the right to respect for private life and communications, and related rights enjoy a high standard of protection. The study also highlights the proposal’s potential benefits and drawbacks more generally.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}

@article{Fahy2017,
title = {Annotatie bij Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens 20 september 2016 (Van Beukering & Het Parool / Nederland)},
author = {Fahy, R. and Beer, K.E.A. de},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EHRC_2017_1.pdf},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-24},
journal = {European Human Right Cases},
number = {1},
abstract = {De zaak Van Beukering en Het Parool B.V. t. Nederland betreft de publicatie van een portret zonder toestemming van de geportretteerde. Het Parool had een artikel geplaatst over het strafproces inzake een rapper die werd verdacht van het plegen van een aantal misdrijven. Bij het artikel had Parool een foto geplaatst van de rapper. De foto was afkomstig uit een documentaire over de rapper “R.P.,” waar hij een aantal jaar eerder aan had meegewerkt. De documentaire werd in het artikel uitvoerig besproken. De documentaire stond op het moment van publicatie nog online. Het gaat in deze zaak om de vraag of Het Parool onrechtmatig heeft gehandeld door de foto van de rapper te publiceren. Het EHRM overweegt dat een afweging moet worden gemaakt tussen twee fundamentele rechten: het recht op eerbiediging van priv\'{e}leven (art. 8 EVRM) van de rapper en het recht op vrijheid van meningsuiting (art. 10 EVRM) van Het Parool. Het Hof stelt vast dat de Hoge Raad geen onredelijke conclusie heeft getrokken door in dit geval art. 8 EVRM te laten prevaleren. Het Hof verklaart het verzoekschrift van Van Beukering en Het Parool niet-ontvankelijk.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}

@techreport{Til2016,
title = {Digital platforms: an analytical framework for identifying and evaluating policy options},
author = {Til, H. van and Nooren, P. and Stokking, H. and Gelevert, H. and van Eijk, N. and Fahy, R.},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1703.pdf},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-07},
abstract = { Kader om beleidsopties ten aanzien van 'digitale platforms' te analyseren.},
note = { TNO-rapport 2015, R11271. Bijlage bij Kamerbrief over toekomstbestendige wetgeving.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@techreport{Til2016b,
title = {Digitale Platforms: een analytisch kader voor het identificeren en evalueren van beleidsopties},
author = {Til, H. van and Nooren, P. and Stokking, H. and Gelevert, H. and van Eijk, N. and Fahy, R.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/digitale-platforms_tno-1.pdf},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-07},
abstract = {Nederlandse samenvatting van rapport "Digital platforms: an analytical framework for identifying and evaluating policy options".
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@techreport{,
title = {Clinical Legal Education: A Review of the Literature},
author = {R.F. Fahy and M.M.M. van Eechoud},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1630.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-09-29},
note = {
iLINC (ICT Law Incubators Network), September 2015.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@techreport{,
title = {Establishing Links to Learning},
author = {R.F. Fahy and M.M.M. van Eechoud},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1631.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-09-29},
note = {
iLINC (ICT Law Incubators Network), Work Package 3, September 2015.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@misc{,
title = {Establishing a Start-up Law Clinic in a Law School - 10 Practical Tips},
author = {R.F. Fahy and M.M.M. van Eechoud},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1684.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-09-29},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}

@techreport{,
title = {Establishing a Start-up Law Clinic in Law School: A Practical Guide},
author = {R.F. Fahy and M.M.M. van Eechoud},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1686.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-09-29},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}

@article{,
title = {Political Advertising Bans and Freedom of Expression},
author = {R.F. Fahy},
url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1534.pdf},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-04-14},
journal = {Greek Public Law Journal},
pages = {226-228},
abstract = {
In \emph{Animal Defenders International v UK}, the 17-judge Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK’s ban on political advertising on television, as applied to an animal rights organisation, did not violate freedom of expression. The Court divided nine votes to eight, with the majority opinion abandoning the Court’s previous ‘strict scrutiny’ review, and laying down a new doctrine for reviewing political advertising bans. This article, first, examines the role the composition of the Grand Chamber played in the outcome of the case. Second, questions the basis of the new doctrine of review. And third, criticises the majority’s treatment of precedent.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}