Judges say commercial partnerships can expose platforms to responsibility for unlawful creator videos

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that Google may be held liable for YouTube videos posted by a creator with whom it has a commercial partnership, in a decision that sharpens Europe’s approach to platform responsibility while preserving protections for neutral hosting services.

The judgment, delivered in Luxembourg on Thursday, 16 July 2026, concerns an Italian dispute over gambling-related videos on YouTube and the scope of liability for online intermediaries. In its latest press release, the Court of Justice listed Case C-421/24 AGCOM under the finding that multimedia platforms may be held liable for videos by a content creator with whom they have a commercial partnership.

The case arose from action by Italy’s communications regulator, AGCOM, over alleged breaches of national rules banning gambling advertising. The ruling does not mean every platform is automatically responsible for all user uploads. It does, however, signal that the legal shield for hosting services is weaker where a platform has closer commercial ties to the creator, knowledge of unlawful content, or a role that goes beyond passive storage.

A platform case with wider reach

For European regulators, the judgment lands at a sensitive moment. Governments and EU institutions are already pressing large platforms to show that monetisation, recommendation systems and creator partnerships do not create incentives for harmful or unlawful content to circulate unchecked.

AGCOM had previously argued that platforms could be responsible where videos were published by third parties with specific commercial partnership contracts. The European Platform of Regulatory Authorities noted in its background on the Italian sanctions that Google Ireland, through YouTube, had been fined in connection with illegal online gambling advertising and ordered to remove related videos and prevent similar uploads by the same entities.

That background matters because platform liability in Europe often turns on whether a service is merely hosting material or whether it has knowledge, control or commercial involvement sufficient to make its role more active. The EPRA summary of AGCOM’s action described the regulator’s reasoning as linked to commercial partnership contracts and alleged knowledge of the content.

The court’s decision is therefore likely to be read closely by regulators, gambling authorities, consumer-protection bodies and digital-rights lawyers across the EU. It may also affect how large video platforms structure creator monetisation programmes, review risky categories of content and document their response when national authorities flag suspected illegality.

Not an end to hosting protections

The ruling does not abolish the principle that online services can benefit from limited liability when they act as neutral intermediaries. That principle remains central to the EU’s digital legal framework. But the decision reinforces a growing distinction between passive hosting and commercially organised distribution.

For users, the most immediate public-interest issue is not only gambling advertising. The same legal logic could shape disputes over other monetised content areas where harm, illegality or vulnerable audiences are at stake. These include scams, unsafe financial promotion, illegal products and content directed at minors.

Europe has been moving in this direction for years. The Digital Services Act and related platform rules aim to make major online services more transparent and accountable without turning them into general censors of all user speech. The European Times has previously covered how the EU’s digital rulebook sought to increase platform obligations while keeping the focus on risk, transparency and enforcement rather than blanket liability for every upload.

In that wider context, Thursday’s judgment adds a practical warning: when a platform profits from a creator relationship, structures visibility through partnership systems, and receives notice of unlawful content, it may face a harder task arguing that it is only a neutral technical host.

Italy now returns to the centre

The Luxembourg ruling will now feed back into the Italian proceedings. National courts and regulators will still have to apply the judgment to the facts of the case, including the exact relationship between Google, YouTube and the creator involved.

For Google and other major platforms, the decision is another reminder that European law is increasingly attentive to the business architecture behind online content. A video may be uploaded by a creator, but the legal question no longer stops there. Courts are asking who monetises it, who has knowledge of it, and whether the platform’s own systems helped turn the content into a commercial product.

That is a narrow legal point with broad consequences. The more platform power is built around partnerships, advertising and recommendation, the more European courts are likely to examine responsibility as a question of design, not only deletion.

KINGNEWSWIRE // Press Release // First Miss & Mrs Cross Continent gathering brings together 24 contestants from seven nations and an audience of 450 at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre in Ireland

DUBLIN, Ireland, 16 July 2026 — Twenty-four contestants representing seven nations brought fashion, cultural traditions and messages of social responsibility to the first edition of the Miss & Mrs Cross Continent pageant, held on 5 July at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin, hosted by Diana Stahl and Asia Kuzma.

The multicultural programme welcomed approximately 450 guests for an afternoon organised around the theme of “beauty and purpose.” Alongside the competition itself, contestants and visitors took part in drug-education activities intended to encourage informed choices and community participation in prevention.

The pageant was sponsored by Broccoli Care Ltd. and organised by Miss & Mrs Cross Continent Events Ltd. in collaboration with The Truth About Drugs Ireland. Contestants presented aspects of their national and personal backgrounds through fashion, artistic performances and individual messages concerning leadership, responsibility and positive change.

The Mayor of South Dublin, Councillor Francis Timmons, addressed the audience and spoke about the value of combining cultural inclusion with preventive education.

“Today’s initiative is an important step in bringing communities together while promoting education and prevention,” Mayor Timmons said. “I was particularly impressed to learn that the contestants embraced The Truth About Drugs campaign as part of their preparation for the pageant. Their willingness to learn and help educate others demonstrates how positive leadership can make a real difference in building healthier, stronger communities.”

The participation of contestants from different cultural backgrounds reflected the increasingly diverse character of communities across Dublin. While the pageant provided a platform for personal achievement and creative expression, organisers also incorporated an educational component intended to give the participants a subject of wider social relevance to examine and communicate.

Drug education before the stage programme

The afternoon began with guided tours of a Truth About Drugs exhibition located at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre. Visitors were introduced to information concerning commonly abused substances, their short- and long-term effects and the social circumstances in which drug use can begin.

The exhibition also presented the educational booklets, documentary materials and online courses available through The Truth About Drugs programme. The materials are designed for use by individuals, parents, teachers, community organisations and prevention volunteers and are provided without religious content.

Many of the contestants began engaging with the programme before the pageant. Several completed all fourteen online courses, while others studied selected modules covering substances including cannabis, cocaine, synthetic drugs, prescription drugs, alcohol and painkillers.

Their participation formed part of the preparation for the competition rather than a separate presentation added on the day. Organisers said the intention was to encourage contestants to consider how public visibility can be connected with social responsibility and the sharing of factual information.

The Truth About Drugs initiative is conducted internationally by the Foundation for a Drug-Free World and supported by the Church of Scientology and Scientologists. Its educational approach is based on presenting information in accessible language before young people are exposed to pressure to experiment with drugs.

The campaign was inspired by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, who wrote that “the single most destructive element present in our present culture is drugs.” The programme developed from the Church’s longstanding involvement in drug-prevention education and is now used in a range of community, school and voluntary settings.

Rather than relying primarily on warnings, the materials explain the composition and effects of different substances and include accounts from people who experienced addiction. The purpose is to give readers sufficient information to evaluate claims they may encounter from peers, advertising, entertainment or illicit drug sellers.

“Bringing drug education into a multicultural gathering gives the subject a human and constructive setting,” said Ivan Arjona, representative of the Church of Scientology to the European Union, OSCE, Council of Europe and the United Nations.

“The contestants came from different nations and professional and cultural backgrounds, yet they shared a willingness to become better informed and to use their influence responsibly,” Arjona added. “This reflects values that are central to European community life: human dignity, personal responsibility, prevention and cooperation across cultures. Social leadership is not defined only by visibility, but by what a person chooses to communicate and contribute.”

Cultural traditions represented in Dublin

Following the exhibition tours, guests moved to the auditorium for the main pageant programme. The contestants appeared in a series of presentations reflecting their individual interests, abilities and national traditions.

The programme also included performances by Scoil Rince Ní Aogáin, led by Denise Egan, presenting the tradition of Irish dance. The Mudra School of Indian Classical Dance contributed performances drawn from Indian artistic traditions, while dancers from the Indonesian Irish Association presented traditional Indonesian culture.

The combination of Irish, Indian, Indonesian and other international contributions placed cultural exchange at the centre of the afternoon. For members of Dublin’s migrant communities, the gathering offered an opportunity to present traditions maintained within families and community associations while participating in a shared public programme.

The presentations were followed by the announcement of winners in several categories. The principal title of Miss Cross Continent 2026 was awarded to Niveditha Vudayagiri, a software engineer who holds a master’s degree in artificial intelligence.

Fortunate Lindokuhle Masina was named first runner-up, and Yuki Yuliatin was selected as second runner-up.

The backgrounds of the finalists illustrated the pageant’s emphasis on achievement beyond physical appearance. Professional development, education, cultural participation and community involvement were presented as relevant aspects of how contestants understood leadership.

The organisers said the first edition was conceived as a meeting point between the pageant sector and community initiatives. The cooperation with The Truth About Drugs Ireland gave contestants a practical educational subject to study and allowed visitors to examine the materials directly during the exhibition tours.

The Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin opened in 2017 as a religious and community facility serving Scientologists and the wider public. Its premises include an auditorium, meeting rooms, sports and recreational facilities and spaces used by local organisations for educational, cultural and charitable programmes.

The Centre has hosted activities involving neighbourhood associations, cultural communities, voluntary groups, educators and public representatives. Its community work includes support for drug prevention, human-rights education, moral education and volunteer initiatives.

The Church of Scientology was founded by author and humanitarian L. Ron Hubbard. In addition to the religious services provided to their congregations, Churches of Scientology and their members support secular programmes addressing drug prevention, human-rights awareness, community values and disaster response.

The Miss & Mrs Cross Continent programme concluded with participants and guests recognising education, cooperation and informed decision-making as practical elements in reducing the harm associated with drug abuse. The afternoon connected those subjects with cultural expression and the role of individuals who use public platforms to address issues affecting their communities.

About the Church of Scientology in Europe

The Church of Scientology, its missions, groups and members are present throughout the European continent. Its recognition as a charitable and bona fide religion continues to grow, reflecting its established religious presence and its commitment to education, prevention, freedom of religion or belief and community betterment. Through cooperation with civil-society organisations and local communities, Scientologists support initiatives intended to address social concerns through practical information and voluntary service.

Council mandate opens talks on 2028-2034 support for asylum, borders and internal security, with safeguards still central to the debate

The Council of the EU has agreed its negotiating position on future funding rules for migration, border management and internal security, moving a sensitive part of the bloc’s next long-term budget into formal talks with the European Parliament. The decision is not only about money. It will help shape how Europe implements its new asylum system, manages external borders, supports integration and returns, and protects fundamental rights in one of the EU’s most politically charged policy areas.

EU governments approved a partial mandate on Wednesday for three regulations covering asylum, migration and integration; border management and visas; and internal security from 2028 to 2034. According to the Council’s negotiating position, the mandate is partial because it excludes the financial envelopes and other horizontal budget questions still being handled in the wider talks on the next Multiannual Financial Framework.

The practical consequence is that ministers have agreed much of the legal architecture before settling the final sums. The Council says the instruments are intended to support the implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, strengthen external border management and visa processing, and help member states respond to internal security threats including organised crime, terrorism, violent extremism, cybercrime and attacks on critical infrastructure.

Funding follows the migration pact

The timing matters. The Migration and Asylum Pact became fully applicable in June 2026 after years of negotiation, shifting the debate from legislative design to implementation. The Commission said in May that member states had made progress on national legislation, screening systems, border procedures, reception capacity and solidarity arrangements, but that further work was still needed on Eurodac, border facilities, transfer rules and legal safeguards.

That implementation gap gives the new funding framework its political weight. In its latest progress report on the Pact, the Commission said operationalising legal guarantees, including fundamental rights monitoring mechanisms, remained one of the tasks still requiring sustained effort.

The Council’s mandate says EU support for migration and asylum should help strengthen the common European asylum system, promote legal migration, integration and social inclusion, and ensure solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between member states. It also refers to “effective, safe and dignified return”, including readmission and reintegration in non-EU countries.

That wording reflects the EU’s attempt to hold together two priorities that often pull in different directions: public pressure for faster and more credible migration management, and the legal obligation to protect people seeking asylum from rushed procedures, unsafe removals or unequal treatment between member states.

Flexibility or weaker scrutiny?

One of the most important changes is the proposed use of national and regional partnership plans. Each member state would prepare a single comprehensive plan setting out planned investments and reforms. The Council says this should allow countries to respond to changing needs and direct support toward actions with clear EU added value.

Flexibility is attractive to governments facing different pressures at different borders. Spain, Italy, Greece, Poland, Germany and the Nordic states do not experience migration, asylum and security challenges in identical ways. A rigid funding model can miss local needs, while a more adaptable one can help reception systems, border infrastructure, integration services and law-enforcement cooperation respond more quickly.

But flexibility also raises a governance question. If member states are not required to contribute to every objective, as the Council position proposes, the EU will need strong transparency over what is funded, what is neglected and how rights safeguards are measured. Funding border capacity without equivalent investment in independent monitoring, legal assistance, reception standards and integration would risk hardening the system without making it fairer.

That concern is already part of the wider budget debate. As The European Times reported in June, the 2028-2034 budget is becoming a broader argument about whether Europe can finance security, migration policy, competitiveness, enlargement and social cohesion while maintaining democratic trust.

Parliament will now shape the safeguards

The Council mandate gives governments a basis to start negotiations with the European Parliament. The final allocations will depend on the overall MFF agreement, which EU institutions want in time for legislation to be adopted in 2027 and funding to begin without interruption on 1 January 2028.

Parliament’s role will be crucial because the policy area sits at the intersection of budget control, civil liberties and national sovereignty. MEPs are likely to scrutinise how much money is directed toward reception, asylum processing, integration and independent oversight, compared with border surveillance, returns and policing tools.

The internal security part of the mandate also deserves careful attention. EU cooperation against organised crime, cybercrime and attacks on infrastructure can protect citizens and public services. Yet security funding must remain bounded by legality, data protection, proportionality and independent review, especially when new systems involve information exchange between EU agencies, national authorities and non-EU partners.

The same is true for returns. European governments are entitled to enforce lawful return decisions after fair procedures. But speed cannot become the main measure of success. A return system that ignores vulnerability, weakens appeals or blurs responsibility through cooperation with third countries would undermine the legal order it claims to defend.

A budget line with human consequences

Migration funding is often presented in institutional language: instruments, envelopes, implementation plans, operational capacity. Behind those terms are people waiting for asylum decisions, local authorities trying to manage reception, border communities carrying disproportionate pressure, and citizens asking whether European rules are both effective and humane.

The Council’s decision does not settle that balance. It begins the next stage of bargaining. The question for EU lawmakers is whether the 2028-2034 framework will finance a system that is merely faster and more controlled, or one that is also more transparent, accountable and rights-compliant.

For Europe, that distinction is not technical. It is the difference between migration policy as crisis management and migration policy as public law.