Social media platforms are more than just a means of communication - they shape public debate and the exercise of the right to freedom of expression. We offer effective procedures for resolving content moderation disputes with social media platforms. Our decisions help to protect the legal order, democratic values and fundamental rights online.
Why out-of-court dispute settlement for content on social media is so important:
Article 21 of the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) allows national Digital Services Coordinators to endow organisations with the task of settling content moderation disputes. These organisations, out-of-court dispute settlement bodies, can then issue decisions on whether content moderation actions, such as the removal of posts or the demotion of content, were justified or not. These decisions are non-binding, but platforms have an obligation to cooperate in good faith. Out-of-court dispute settlement has the potential to improve platform accountability and protect rights and democracy. As one of the first organisations to be certified, User Rights is a pioneer in the field.
Dr. Niklas Eder is the Co-Founder and Co-CEO of User Rights. Before that, he worked at the University of Oxford and taught the course “Technology, Democracy and Society” at King’s College London. Earlier in his career, he worked with the Oversight Board and was a visiting fellow at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School and at Columbia University. He earned his PhD in European constitutional law and legal philosophy from the University of Leipzig.
Raphael Kneer is co-founder and Co-CEO of User Rights. Before founding User Rights, he practised as a lawyer for several years and co-founded a legal-tech company in the field of collective labour rights. He studied law in Heidelberg and Madrid; his legal traineeship at the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court included assignments at the Europe Division of the German Federal Foreign Office and at the German Embassy in Lima.
Prof. Dr. Stephan Breidenbach is a professor, mediator and entrepreneur. He has extensive experience as an arbitrator, including at the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce) in Paris and the CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport), in addition to his experience advising the German government. He is the founder of social initiatives (such as Schule im Aufbruch) and impact companies (such as betterplace.org/gut.org AG).
A central principle of the Digital Services Act (DSA) is that there is no single solution to safeguarding fundamental rights online. Instead, the DSA establishes a framework in which multiple mechanisms—such as individual remedies and systemic risk assessments—work in parallel. It also brings together a range of actors, including civil society organisations and certified bodies under Article 21.
In collaboration with Alliance4Europe, User Rights has examined how out-of-court dispute settlement—operated in an impartial and independent manner—can be made available for use by civil society organisations seeking to protect freedom of expression and democracy online.
This guide outlines our model and explains how certified dispute resolution, when implemented neutrally and in line with the DSA, can be accessed by civil society as part of the broader regulatory framework.
Harvard Business Manager sat down with User Rights co-founder Raphael Kneer to explore how the Berlin-based organisation is holding platforms like Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, LinkedIn and Pinterest accountable under the Digital Services Act and why the fight for cooperation is an everyday battle.
Nach dem DSA sollen außergerichtliche Stellen Streitigkeiten zwischen Plattformen wie Facebook und ihren Nutzern schlichten. Die User Rights GmbH ist die erste dieser Stellen in Deutschland. Nach gut einem halben Jahr ziehen die Gründer Niklas Eder und Raphael Kneer im Gespräch Bilanz.
Art. 21 DSA is a new, unusual and interesting framework to settle disputes over online content moderation decisions. It might be described as a “new animal”, introducing alternatives to existing redress mechanisms.
La aparición en Irlanda de un "centro de apelaciones" contra las plataformas pone en el foco uno de los aspectos menos conocidos del Reglamento de Servicios Digitales.
Out-Of-Court Dispute Settlement Bodies and the Struggle to Adjudicate Platforms in Europe.
Complain to the Platform, the Digital Services Coordinator, or Go Straight to Court?
Those who want to challenge decisions made by an online platform have many options.
If you feel unfairly treated by a social network, you can now have the decision independently reviewed. However, this is not legally binding for the platforms.
Instagram, TikTok, and LinkedIn Users Can Now Report Issues to a Complaint Office – Here’s How It Works
The Federal Network Agency has established a mediation office for users of TikTok, Instagram, and LinkedIn. Here, users can challenge decisions made by the platforms—for example, if their account has been suspended.
For press inquiries, please contact:
Raphael Kneer
press@user-rights.org
We review complaints from users whose social media posts have been deleted or moderated. We also review complaints from individuals or organisations who have reported content that has not been removed by a platform. Our content moderation assessment covers suspected or alleged violations of German law and violations of platform terms and conditions EU-wide. We review German and English-language content. We are currently accepting complaints about Instagram, TikTok, and LinkedIn. We plan to expand our work and accept complaints about further social media platforms in the coming months.
The Digital Services Act (DSA) is a European regulation that aims to create a safe and transparent digital space on the internet. The DSA obliges online platforms to cooperate with independent dispute resolution bodies such as User Rights. The regulation sets out rules and responsibilities for online platforms in order to ensure the protection of fundamental rights and effectively combat illegal and harmful content.
In short, you file a complaint, and we will do the rest. You will receive a reasoned decision at the end of the procedure. Our independence and expertise have been certified by the competent authority. Social media platforms are legally obliged to work with us and pay our fees.
We examine your rights in both a national and European context. While our decisions are not directly binding, online platforms are obliged to cooperate with us and to check whether there is any reason why our decision should not be implemented. Our decision will also allow you to assess your options for further action in case the platform does not implement our decision.
We are independent and are financed by fees incurred as part of reviewing cases, paid by the online platforms. We are allowed to charge the online platforms reasonable fees for the proceedings. These fees are limited in amount and are regularly reviewed by the competent authority.
You want to know exactly how we work? Download the Rules of Procedure and Schedule of Fees here:
