Users with suspended accounts on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, TikTok or WhatsApp, without the right to defense, contradictory and without expressly mentioning the reason for the violation, can request compensation
Undue blocking of a social media account is no longer just a discomfort. For those who use networks like Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, TikTok and WhatsApp to make money, being offline for a few days brings real losses. According to lawyer Flávio Guerra, a specialist in Consumer Law, suspensions carried out unilaterally by the platform, without the right to defense, contradictory and without expressly mentioning the reason for the violation, give the user the right to receive compensation for moral damages. and, upon demonstration, materials.
With the increased use of these platforms, law firms are receiving more and more cases of complaints like these, as is the case with the Guerra Pelo Consumidor Office, which constantly receives requests for guidance and information from Amazonians about the abrupt banning of their accounts. .
“I receive numerous complaints from Amazonians asking for guidance on this type of situation. It is evident that losses suffered in different ways: the loss of visibility on the platform and the (illegal) deprivation of their work tool and source of income. Furthermore, it is noted that the suspension per se characterizes an extremely vexatious situation: it is certain that the party loses credibility in the digital environment, whether with its followers and fans, or with its contractors”, explained Guerra.
Right of reply is a constitutional guarantee
According to the lawyer, in addition to being punished for blocking the networks, as they use them professionally, they still do not know the reasons why this happened, without, at least, being notified in advance about what the violation would have been. However, according to the expert, the right to reply is a constitutional guarantee for citizens and also applies to large communication networks.
“Article 20 says that whenever you have contact information for the user directly responsible for the content referred to in art. 19, it will be up to the internet application provider to communicate the reasons and information relating to the unavailability of content, with information that allows contradictory and full defense in court, unless expressly provided by law or expressly determined by a court to the contrary. The thing is, without information, there is no effective means of defending the user”, he highlighted.
Therefore, the 1st Civil Court of the Forum of Taubaté, of the Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJSP) understood and cited that “mere suspicion of abuse of contractual conditions, without specific indication of the infraction that would justify the suspension of the service, does not authorize the unilateral cancellation of the social network account used, as well as other contracted functionalities, without the service provider offering conditions for the party to recover the content of documents and products for which there is no suspicion of abuse”.
In another case, in the Federal District, the judge of the 4th Special Civil Court of Brasília sentenced Facebook Serviços Online Brasil to pay moral damages for having blocked a user’s profile, without presenting the reasons for this. It was also determined that the provider does not block the account in question again.
—
Via Tukandeira Communication
