Objectives:
In our analysis, we combine cognitive perspectives: legal, sociological, psychological, economic and cultural. The initial questions are: How is the concept of pathology constituted? How should the degree of harmfulness of ,,patostreamers’” activities be interpreted and measured?

Methods:
We distinguish three areas of greater, medium and marginal social harmfulness of ,,(pato-) streamers’” activities. We use comparative law methods as supplementary tool and analyse selected provisions of European Union, German and French law.

Results:
A rational regulatory policy must be based on the appropriate selection of methods and specific instruments. In theoretical terms, there are three methods of regulation: criminal, civil and administrative. We argue that Polish legislators should use all instruments - apply a mixed method. The criminal method is useful for classifying new forms of prohibited acts in the environment of electronic media users. The civil law approach seems to be the most appropriate in the area of protecting the personal goods of victims of ,,patostreaming”. The administrative approach provides instruments for regulating the rights and obligations of Internet users and for regulating the use of technical infrastructure.

Conclusions:
We argue that the phenomenon of ,,patostreaming” is so complex and heterogeneous that it is currently pointless to include a general legal definition in Polish legislation.