The Jean Pormanove streamer affair, a dark French affair

The first reaction is sadness, indignation and dismay. But a society cannot stop at emotion: it must also learn the necessary lessons and strengthen its instruments of prevention and regulation.

Beyond the heady dramatic repercussions, these events raise the question of the role of justice and the regulatory mechanisms applicable to platforms. With this in mind, our article offers a factual review of the chronology of the case, followed by a legal perspective, in a format that is deliberately clear, concise and educational, in order to place this tragedy within its legal framework and offer keys to understanding.

1. Background to Kick

• December 2022 : Launch of Kick, a live video streaming platform based in Australia, by the founders of Stake[1] (an online casino gaming site). It features a particularly attractive model for creators:
• 95% of revenues go to the streamers and 5% to the platform[2].
• Moderation is reputedly more permissive than on other platforms such as Twitch.

• Before January 2025: Although based outside the European Union, Kick distributes its services in the member states, and therefore had to comply with European and French rules governing the regulation of online content (DSA).
• Recurring controversies: The platform has become a “lucrative haven”[3] for streamers banned from Twitch for forbidden practices, such as Nazi salutes or humiliation, as revealed last December by Mediapart.

Kick is regularly criticized for its shocking or violent content, moderation deemed too lax, and notably the case of the live death of streamer Jean Pormanove in August 2025.

2. Regulatory pressure: DSA and appointment of representative

• January 2025

• The German network authority (Bundesnetzagentur) is sending Kick an official request to appoint a legal representative in the EU, in accordance with Article 13 of the Digital Services Act (DSA).

3. Appointment of a representative in Malta

• August 20, 2025:Arcom (the French regulator) announces that Kick has appointed a legal representative based in Malta, providing at least a partial response to the non-compliance situation.
• It then entered into discussions with the Maltese regulator to obtain details on the moderation of French-language content and the specific case of the “Jeanpormanove” channel.
• August 22, 2025: The Malta Communications Authority (MCA) states that it has not yet received formal notification from Kick of the appointment of the representative, despite the visible update on the site. It requests clarification to verify compliance with article 13 of the DSA.

4. Triggering events: problematic content and live death

The “Jeanpormanove” channel is France’s leading Kick channel, with almost 192,500 subscribers and 15,000 viewers every evening in real time by 2025. On this channel, two “influencers” from Nice[4] have developed several “concepts” around the theme of disability: Jean Pormanove, real name Raphaël Graven, a former soldier, and “Coudoux”, a vulnerable man under guardianship, are subjected to physical and verbal abuse in the form of challenges from each other. Viewers make donations to encourage challenges and often more violence.

• Between December 2 and 9, 2024
  • La chaîne « Jeanpormanove » est bannie pour la première fois, à la suite de plusieurs saluts nazis réalisés et de gifles sur une personne handicapée orchestrés par les deux influenceurs qui animent la chaîne pendant un live.
• December 10, 2024
  • La chaîne réapparait sur Kick.
• December 15, 2024
  • Une enquête de Mediapart met en lumière la chaîne « Jeanpormanove » où étaient diffusées des scènes de violences humiliantes envers des personnes vulnérables (JP et Courdoux). Une enquête est engagée pour « violences volontaires en réunion sur personnes vulnérables » et diffusion d’images illicites.

A preliminary investigation was launched by the public prosecutor the day after the Mediapart investigation was published on December 16.

Three charges would have been brought:

• Public incitement to hatred or violence against a person or group of persons on the grounds of their disability, by a means of communication to the public by electronic means,
• Voluntary assaults on vulnerable persons resulting in TIW of less than 8 days
• Dissemination of recordings of images relating to the commission of offences of intentional harm to the integrity of the person.”(source)

Safine and Naruto were taken into custody on January 8 and released the same day.

• August 18, 2025
  • Mort en direct de Raphaël Graven, alias Jean Pormanove, diffusée sur Kick, après plus de 12 jours de stream non-stop avec des scènes violentes voir insoutenables à son encontre.
• August 20, 2025
  • Kick annonce avoir banni tous les co-streamers concernés de la plateforme et lancé une revue des contenus francophones.

5. Lifting the block on the problem chain

• August 21, 2025

  :Polylang placeholder do not modify

• August 22, 2025Polylang

  placeholder do not modify

The authority urges Kick to reactivate the block, and announces that it will “examine all possible courses of action” if it does not.

• August 22, 2025
  • La plateforme lève le blocage de la chaîne, affirmant que la remise en ligne vise à permettre l’accès aux contenus pour les investigations[5].
• August 26, 2025 :
  • The French Minister for the Digital Economy, Clara Chappaz, has announced that she intends to take legal action against the Kick platform, for “failure to comply with the French law on confidence in the digital economy (LCEN)”, and more specifically with article 6-3, which allows “the prevention of damage or the cessation of damage caused by the content of an online public communication service”.
  • At the same time, the Paris public prosecutor’s office announced on the same day that it had opened an investigation (in addition to the one already launched by the Nice public prosecutor’s office) into the “organized supply of an illegal online platform”. The procedure, this time criminal and led by Ofac, aims in particular to verify “whether the Kick platform meets the obligations arising from the European regulation on digital services (DSA)”.
  • According to statements by Kick reported by Le Figaro[AP1], the company says it is “disappointed” by the Minister’s announcement of legal action, and “also claims never to have received any requests from the French authorities to close the channel, despite Mediapart‘s articles “.

• August 28, 2025 :
  • Streamer Naruto announces the end of the “Lokal”, where Jean Pormanove was physically and psychologically abused during Kick lives.

Pending the decision of the public prosecutor’s office, and given the elements of the case made public so far, we can suspect that he was the victim of “voluntary violence in a group, probably on a vulnerable person”. This state of vulnerability, which has yet to be determined by the investigation, could constitute an aggravating circumstance(source).

Note: in a video on July 26, the two influencers questioned their responsibility in the event of the death of JP or Coudoux. They asked Jean Pormanove and two other live participants, including Coudoux, to declare, on camera, that if they died “live”, it would be their own responsibility, not that of the influencers.

The legal approach

In all EU countries, a “digital services coordinator” (DSC), an independent authority appointed by each member state, has been set up.

In France, the national coordinator is Arcom, as provided for in the law of May 21, 2024 aimed at securing and regulating the digital space. In other countries, it is also the media authority. These 27 coordinators are responsible for monitoring compliance with the DSA regulation in their countries, and for receiving complaints against online intermediaries.

1. Legal status of streaming platforms: in principle a hosting service[AP2].

Under French and European law, streaming platforms such as Kick benefit from the lighter liability regime for hosting providers[7], stemming from the e-commerce directive 2000/31/EC and transposed into French law by the LCEN of 2004(Article 14 of the e-commerce directive and Article 6 of the DSA, which replace the former Article 6-I of the LCEN[8]).

• Unlike content publishers (such as TV channels), hosters are not a priori responsible for the content uploaded by users.
• They can only be held liable if they fail to act: if they are informed of illegal content and do not remove it “promptly”: this is the “notice and take down” mechanism.
• Reporting by spectators: in practice, this is the main channel, via the notification mechanism provided for in the DSA (article 16).
• This status creates a tension, because Kick’s monetization, live broadcasting and showcasing model confuses genres, while at the same time claiming this protection from the regime.

2. No legal representative of Kick

Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, known as the DSA, has been applicable since February 2024 and considerably strengthens the obligations of platforms that host content in the EU:

• General obligation of moderation (art. 14 et seq.): implementation of internal reporting procedures and rapid processing of notifications.
• Transparency (art. 15 et seq.): regular publication of moderation reports.
• Appointment of a legal representative in the EU (art. 13): the DSA requires any platform offering services in the EU to appoint a legal representative in a member country.

However, Kick would initially have had no head office or representative in Europe. This made it difficult for Arcom to issue direct injunctions or initiate binding procedures.

However, Kick, with fewer than 45 million monthly visitors in the EU – the threshold above which “very large online platforms” are subject to a heightened liability regime – remains subject to the DSA and must nevertheless appoint a representative in Europe. This absence has been recognized as a “failure” by Arcom, which is powerless to deal with Kick’s lack of a representative in Europe.

• Did the absence of a representative prevent Arcom from acting?

Contrary to the idea that the absence of a legal representative would prevent any intervention by Arcom, the DSA expressly grants powers to the national authorities even in such a situation(Article 56 paragraph 7 of the DSA).

Under this article, when a service provider such as Kick does not appoint a legal representative within the Union, all the digital service coordinators (DSCs) in the Member States become competent to ensure compliance with the DSA’s obligations. In France, this task falls to Arcom, designated as the CSC. Thus, the absence of a legal representative does not prevent its action: on the contrary, it enables Arcom to intervene directly, without depending on the initiative of another member state.

The text states: “Where an intermediary service provider fails to appoint a legal representative in accordance with Article 13, all Member States and, in the case of providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines, the Commission, shall have supervisory and enforcement powers in accordance with this Article.”

Thus, the explicit failure to appoint a representative (article 13 DSA), but also the extended competence granted to digital services coordinators by article 56 al 7, could trigger, according to article 51 DSA:

• A formal notice from Arcom to demand DSA compliance.
• An investigation into other potential breaches of the DSA, such as the lack of moderation of illicit content through the failure to process alerts under article 16.
• Financial penalties or injunctions.
• Bring the case before a national court[9]:

According to article 51 .2 e) “the power to adopt provisional measures or to request the competent national judicial authority of their State

member to do so in order to avoid the risk of serious harm.”

According to Article 51.3 b) (…) request the competent judicial authority of its Member State to order a temporary restriction of access by recipients to the service concerned by the infringement or, only where this is not technically feasible, to the online interface of the intermediary service provider on which the infringement occurs…”.

ARCOM does not have the power to directly remove online content, but is responsible for verifying compliance with DSA rules for platforms under French jurisdiction.

According to the French law on “securing and regulating digital space” (Sren), it is up to the administrative or judicial authority to order this. Generally speaking, Arcom must therefore go through a judge to obtain the removal or blocking of illegal content. However, in France, in the specific case of the removal of child pornography and images of torture or barbaric acts, the Office anti-cybercriminalité (Ofac) is responsible for making the request[10] directly to hosting service providers. Ofac is also responsible for the official platform for reporting illegal content, Pharos. Thus, although Arcom cannot directly order the removal of content or the blocking of a platform, it could refer the matter to a French judge to request emergency measures, such as the removal of the “Jeanpormanove” channel or the blocking of access to Kick in France.

3. A home country

Article 56 paragraph 6 of the DSA states that the regulation of a platform is primarily the responsibility of the Member State in which the legal representative is appointed.

In the specific case of Kick, which would have appointed a legal representative in Malta on August 20, 2025, it is the Maltese regulator that is now primarily competent to supervise its regulatory obligations and ensure control of the platform on European territory. In line with this principle, Arcom, the French authority, does not have primary responsibility for Kick’s administrative supervision. It can, however, notify alleged breaches to the Maltese regulator and the European Commission (articles 58, 59 and 60 of the DSA), through a cross-border cooperation mechanism set up by the regulation between coordinators and the possibility of joint investigations.

• Possible derogation from the principle in the event of a serious breach of public order

In contrast to the country-of-origin principle, there is what might be called the “targeted country approach”, whereby the law of the country in which the service is received can be applied, even if the service is provided by a company established elsewhere. This exception is provided for in several provisions of European law, notably article 9 of the DSA. There are exceptions to the principle of connection to a principal country, notably in cases of serious breach of public policy (article 3 paragraph 4 of the E-Commerce Directive). These infringements concern in particular :

• Protection of minors,
• The fight against illegal content (violence, incitement to hatred, etc.),
• Preserving human dignity.

In these situations, a local authority, such as Arcom in France, can go beyond the exclusive jurisdiction of the home or host state, and intervene directly within its territory.

In the “Jeanpormanove” case, the content broadcast on Kick included serious elements likely to constitute a breach of public order, in particular by undermining human dignity through violence and humiliation.

Thus, the authorities had a legal basis to invoke this derogation in order to act quickly, even before the legal representative was appointed in Malta, which could have resulted in the application of the provisions of article 51 of the DSA mentioned above.

4. Forum shopping and cross-border complexity:

The coordination process between national regulators and the European Commission remains complex and slow, which has enabled Kick to impede any compliance process, notably by occasionally reactivating the “jeanpormanove” channel despite Arcom’s requests to block it.

The Australian regulator has exposed Kick to an A$49.5 million fine if it is found to be in breach of Australia’s laws on exposure to violent content[AP3].

---

[1] Stake has been banned in several countries, including France, Italy, Portugal, the USA, Syria and Turkey. In all, nearly fifty jurisdictions have banned its activity, either for religious reasons or as part of the fight against gambling addiction (source: Médiapart).

[2] On Twitch, for example, streamers pay out 30% to 50% of their revenues.

[3] Among them is youtuber Marvel Fitness, who was sentenced in 2020 to 2 years in prison for cyberstalking.

[4] These two influencers are known by the pseudonyms “safine” and “naruto”.

[5] The platform felt that lifting the block was “the only way to respond to requests from the regulator and all stakeholders (ministries and the OFAC anti-cybercrime office), who have expressed a desire to access the audiovisual content of the ‘jeanpormanove’ channel in order to uncover any shortcomings committed by the platform in moderating its content”, according to Arcom.

[6] It should be pointed out that there are other ways of transmitting the videos, more suited to the seriousness of such a situation. For example, the content could have been placed on “private broadcast” and made accessible only to the competent authorities, or it could have been communicated directly from the data stored on Kick’s internal servers.

[7] Paris Court of Appeal, 1st Chamber, December 2, 2014.

[8] Repealed by law no. 2024-449 of May 21, 2024.

[9] Confirmed by article 6-3 of the LCEN.

[10] Decree no. 2025-146 of February 18, 2025.

---

[ AP1]Footnote Figaro Tech Web 1.9.25

[ AP2]NDB DSA article 3.i

[ AP3]NBP to the Guardian on August 21.