JUDGE AND PARTY NO MORE.

Online platforms make plenty of moderation mistakes.

We are yet to meet someone happy with how content moderation is done on social media. Content gets taken down unfairly. Content remains up despite being illegal or in violation of the platform's own guidelines. The rules are not the same for everyone: influential accounts appear to operate with near-immunity, while smaller users others are subject to moderation decisions that look inconsistent at best and arbitrary at worst. 

The EU's Digital Services Act evens the playing field for users in disputes with online platforms by creating independent arbitration bodies.

Platforms are both judge and party to all moderation decisions. As businesses, their interests do not lay in fairness and due process but in minimizing costs and trouble. Although national courts can theoretically step in and order a platform to fix mistakes, few people file a lawsuit over a tweet.

The DSA (Article 21) changes this by creating special independent review bodies that review moderation decisions and rule independently on each case brought to them. Platforms do not have obligations to listen to abide by those decisions but are heavily encouraged to do so.

Vigilia can represent users in front of these arbitration bodies.

As an EU non-profit active in tech, Vigilia is authorized to represent users and submit claims on their behalf.

STEP 1: YOU LET US KNOW IF YOU ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT SOMETHING BIG TECH DID (OR DID NOT DO)

If you are an individual or organization based in Europe and you see something wrong on any platform, send us a quick email.

The following count as "something wrong":

• A social media platform removed your content. Had a post removed for showing too much skin, saying something that Mr. Musk didn't like or got called out on any other violation that seems unfair ? Our job is to try to get the post reinstated and the platform to receive a penalty for it.
  
  Please note that we will not take on obviously-infringing cases. If you posted blatantly illegal content, we are not able nor willing to help you.
• A social media platform did not remove content. The internet is not a pretty place. Some content is illegal (think child abuse material, incitement to violence, or supporting terrorism), other is lawful-but-awful and could be forbidden under the platform's own rules. If you see it, let us know !

STEP 2: YOU LET US HANDLE IT

We have been working in the field for a long time: we know platforms' moderation policies, what is illegal in the various countries of the EU, and where to get redress.

We take your case to those that have the best chance of helping you solve it. It usually takes around a month.

STEP 3: YOU (HOPEFULLY) BASK IN THE GLORY OF YOUR WIN

If the arbitration body rules in our favor, great ! In most cases, the platform follows the arbitration body's recommendation (it doesn't legally have to implement each decision, but systematically ignoring them exposes the platform to potentially large fines). Justice is served, the platform has a chance and a new data point to improve its moderation system. It has to pay the arbitration body and to pay the user back for the costs incurred during the procedure.
‍
If the arbitration body does not rule in our favor, too bad ! However, neither you nor Vigilia has to reimburse the platform's expenses.

72.92 € per case, usually reimbursed by the platform. 

These costs serve to cover our expenses when filing the complaint, including communication with the platform and the out-of-court dispute settlement body.

The good news is that the the law is clear: platforms have to cover the costs of the procedure when you win, and Vigilia has a success rate of over 90%.

If the arbitration body rules in your favour, Vigilia will ask on your behalf the platform to reimburse the costs of representation.

In particular cases (such as bulk representation or particularly complex cases), costs might differ. Please refer to the full cost schedule here.