The role of Internet intermediaries in combatting cybercrime: Organisation and liabilities

Kinga Sorbán, National University of Public Services


Even though the internet is a very useful asset to everyday life, it can facilitate crime as it can be used to achieve unlawful goals. Stepping up against cybercrime effectively requires extensive international cooperation between law enforcement agencies and the private sector, and between the law enforcement agencies themselves. Internet intermediary service providers such as ISPs, hosting providers and search engine providers are in a special position when it comes to tackling cybercrime: they have to balance carefully between protecting the rights of their users (such as the right to privacy or free speech) and exercising corporate responsibility to prevent and respond to cybercrimes. These providers are sometimes indispensable participants of a successful investigation, because they are the entities that are in a position to provide data to law enforcement agencies and carry out blocking orders. One of the aims of this paper is to give a short overview of those voluntary and obligatory actions that the providers take in order to support the investigative process in Hungary. Besides these actions that stem from the social responsibility and legally enacted obligations, the providers may also be held liable for the actions of third parties (although they may be exempted if certain conditions are met). The second aim of this paper is to analyze the twofold nature of the position of intermediary service providers and to map the arising conflicts between their liability and their role as participants of cybercrime investigations.


[1] DINWOODIE, G. B., A Comparative Analysis of the Secondary Liability of Online Service Providers. In: Dinwoodie, Graeme B. (ed.): Secondary Liability of Internet Service Providers, Springer, 2017. p. 2.

[2] DORNFELD, L., A közvetítő szolgáltatók felelőssége az internetes tartalmakért KRIMINOLÓGIAI KÖZLEMÉNYEK 78 pp. 101-117, p. 17 (2018).

[3] FROSIO, G. F., Why keep a dog and bark yourself? From intermediary liability to responsibility International Journal of Law and Information Technology, Volume 26, Issue 1, 1 March 2018, p. 1–33.

[4] KLEIN, T., (szerk.), Tanulmányok a technológia- és cyberjog néhány aktuális kérdéséről Budapest, Magyarország, Médiatudományi Intézet (2018) , p. 12.

[5] KOLTAY, A., Az újmédia kapuőreinek hatása a médiaszabályozásra. In: Gellén Klára (szerk.): Jog, innováció, versenyképesség. Budapest, Wolters Kluwer, 2017, p. 99-124.

[6] KŐHIDI, Á., A jogsértő internetes tartalommal szembeni jogi eszközrendszer In: Koltay, András; Török, Bernát (szerk.) Sajtószabadság és médiajog a 21. század elején 3 Budapest, Magyarország : CompLex Wolters Kluwer, (2016) pp. 375-402. p. 27.

[7] LAIDLAW, E. B., Internet Gatekeepers, Human Rights and Corporate Social Responsibilities. A thesis submitted to the Law Department of the London School of Economics and Political Science For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 2012. p. 111.

[8] LICHTMAN, D. G. and POSNER, E., Holding Internet Service Providers Accountable (John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 217, 2004).

[9] TADDEO, M. and FLORIDI, L., The Moral Responsibilities of Online Service Providers. In: Taddeo, Mariarosaria, Floridi, Luciano (Eds.): The Responsibilities of Online Service Providers, Springer, 2017. p. 14.


Central and Eastern European e|Dem and e|Gov Days 2019

Cyber Security and eGovernment
Proceedings of the Central and Eastern European E|Dem and E|Gov Days, May 2-3, 2019, Budapest
Facultas, 1. Ed., 536 p.
ISBN: 978-3-7089-1898-3,
ISBN: 978-3-903035-24-9

Editors: András Nemeslaki, Alexander Prosser, Dona Scola, Tamás Szádeczky