On June 26, 2025, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF) concluded the judgment of General Repercussion Themes 987 and 533, which addressed the constitutionality of Article 19 of the Brazilian Internet Bill of Rights (Law No. 12,965/2014).

By majority vote, the Court ruled that digital platforms may be held liable for user-generated content even without a court order, changing the previous framework and creating new obligations for online companies.

The Court ruled that its decision will only apply to future cases, leaving past cases unaffected.

What changed?

• Liability without a court order

Before: Platforms could only be held liable after a specific court order.

Now: A clear and well-founded notice sent outside of court—by the affected person, their lawyer, or a legitimate organization—is usually enough to require action from the platform. If it does not act, the platform may be held liable for failing to respond.

Exception: For crimes against someone’s reputation (like defamation or slander), a court order is still required to remove the content.

• Proactive duty of care

Before: No express obligation to act preventively.

Now: For particularly serious crimes — including terrorism, child pornography, racism, incitement to suicide — platforms must act proactively to prevent dissemination, regardless of notification, under penalty of being held liable for “systemic failure”.

• Presumed civil liability

Before: Liability depended on failure to act after notification.

Now: Platforms are presumed liable in two cases: (1) when the content is paid or sponsored, and (2) when it's spread through bots or automated messages. To avoid liability, the platform must prove it acted quickly and responsibly to remove the content.

• Structural obligations

Before: Platforms were not required to offer complaint or reporting channels.

Now: Platforms must have permanently accessible channels where anyone (users or not) can report harmful content or request action.

• Local legal representation in Brazil

Before: Platforms did not need to have a legal representative in Brazil.

Now: Platforms must appoint a legal representative in Brazil with public and accessible contact information.

Pending matters

The decision fails to delineate the parameters of a “reasonable time” within which platforms must act on content removal requests, or to define the criteria that would characterize a systemic failure.

It also makes no distinction between large platforms and small providers, which could create practical challenges when applying the rules.

Read the full text of the general repercussion thesis.

Read the case summary (Public Information Notice).

The MAC Advogados team closely follows developments in Digital Law and is ready to help your company. You can count on us for clear, strategic, and reliable guidance in this changing legal landscape.