http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40444354
>Social media companies in Germany face fines of up to 50m euros ($57.1; £43.9m) if they fail to remove "obviously illegal" content in time.
>From October, Facebook, YouTube, and other sites with more that two million users in Germany must take down posts containing hate speech or other criminal material within 24 hours.
>Content that is not obviously unlawful must be assessed within seven days.
>Failure to comply will result in a 5m euro penalty, which could rise to 50m euros depending on the severity of the offence.
>But it has already been condemned by human rights groups and industry representatives.
>They claim the tight time limits are unrealistic, and will lead to accidental censorship as technology companies err on the side of caution and delete ambiguous posts to avoid paying penalties.
>The law will not come into force until after the German federal elections, which will be held in September.
>Justice Minister Heiko Maas singled out Facebook, which has some 30 million users in Germany, saying experience had shown that without political pressure, "the large platform operators would not fulfil their obligations" to take down illegal content.
>He added that while the law "does not solve all problems", it tackles the issue of hate crimes on social media, which are "increasingly a problem in many countries".
>Mr Maas, who oversaw the legislation, told the German parliament that online hate crimes had increased by almost 300% in the past few years, adding that "no one should be above the law".
>The bill was drafted after several high-profile incidents of fake news and criminal hate speech being spread on social media sites in Germany. One case involved the targeting of prominent Green MP Renate Kunast, with a post that falsely suggested she was sympathetic to a refugee who had murdered a German student in the southern city of Freiburg.
>For its part, Facebook said it had already made "substantial progress" in removing illegal content, and called into question the efficacy of the law.
>The bill has also faced criticism from human right's campaigners.
>"Many of the violations covered by the bill are highly dependent on context, context which platforms are in no position to assess," wrote the UN Special Rapporteur to the High Commissioner for Human Rights, David Kaye.
>He added that "the obligations placed upon private companies to regulate and take down content raises concern with respect to freedom of expression".
>The law could still be stopped in Brussels, where campaigners have claimed it breaches EU laws.
Has this taken effect?
If this has a chance to pass when will voting commence?