The European Court of Justice held that intermediaries cannot be held liable for infringing content on the ground of mere awareness; rather, it would need to be shown that they played an active role in publishing or providing the infringing content. 

The European Court of Human Rights held that the applicant, a news website, had justifiably been held liable for proscribed speech posted in the comments section on its web platform despite having no actual knowledge of the same. The Court expressly noted that the case did not concern intermediaries of other kinds such as social media platforms where the standard of liability would be different. 

The European Court of Human Rights marked a shift away from its ruling in Delfi and adopted a notice-and-take-down model for regulation of intermediary liability under the European Convention on Human Rights.