Internetdelikte und die Herausforderungen des Forum Shoppings

E-print/Working paper (2017)

Internetrecht

Article for general public (2017)

Länderbericht Deutschland

in Cole, Mark; Ory, Stephan (Eds.) Fotografien in der Großregion (2016)

The Redtube Copyright Infringement Affair in Germany: Shame on Who?

in International Review of Law, Computers & Technology (2015), 29(1), 33-49

Facebook’s Real Name Policy: Bye-Bye, Max Mustermann?

in Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law (2013), 4(3), 190-204

Facebook requires all members to use their real names and email addresses when joining the social network. Not only does the policy seem to be difficult to enforce (as the prevalence of accounts with ... [more ▼]

Facebook requires all members to use their real names and email addresses when joining the social network. Not only does the policy seem to be difficult to enforce (as the prevalence of accounts with people’s pets or fake names suggests), but it may also interfere with European (and, in particular, German) data protection laws. A German Data Protection Commissioner recently took action and ordered that Facebook permit pseudonymous accounts as its current anti-pseudonymous policy violates § 13 VI of the German Telemedia Act. This provision requires telemedia providers to allow for an anonymous or pseudonymous use of services insofar as this is reasonable and technically feasible. Irrespective of whether the pseudonymous use of Facebook is reasonable, the case can be narrowed down to one single question: Does German data protection law apply to Facebook? In that respect, this paper analyses the current Facebook dispute, in particular in relation to who controls the processing of personal data of Facebook users in Germany. It also briefly discusses whether a real name policy really presents a fix for anti-normative and anti-social behaviour on the Internet. [less ▲]

The US SOPA and PIPA - A European Perspective

in International Review of Law, Computers & Technology (2013), 27(1-2), 213-229

Protection of the Content of a 'Wiki' Database under the European Database Directive

E-print/Working paper (2012)

ONLINE ARCHIVES: Finding a Common Ground in the Quicksand of Online Defamation Developments

in European Journal of Law and Technology (2012), 3(1),

Nowhere is the world smaller than on the Internet. With one mouse click, people from across the globe can re-acquaint themselves with old friends, research the unknown, read newspapers from faraway places ... [more ▼]

Nowhere is the world smaller than on the Internet. With one mouse click, people from across the globe can re-acquaint themselves with old friends, research the unknown, read newspapers from faraway places and times. As the world cyber-shrinks, the ways in which governments and courts attempt to control the information on the web has become diverse and contradictory. Issues of national interest and international jurisdiction have stretched across all aspects of the web. We must find a more cooperative, coherent and consistent international policy, one which fosters the free flow of information, while protecting personality rights. The controversy is not limited to the present, but affects the way the Internet records and preserves history. As newspapers bring massive archives online, they are faced with defamation laws which may hinder the free flow of information or inadequately protect personality rights. What is protected speech in one country may be defamation judged from another country in a future time. This paper explores the traditional liability regimes concerning paper archives and how these laws are applied to online archives available on the web. The paper explores how national courts are attempting to mold traditional theories of liability to fit the new Internet-based reality of publishing and archive maintenance. The paper explores the recent case in Germany, which extends national jurisdiction into the New York Times archives in New York City, as well as cases specifically dealing with online defamation standards. We also review the enforcement of defamation judgments from foreign jurisdictions in the US, where many of the media outlets involved in the litigation are headquartered. The paper then outlines recent developments to “combat” libel tourism in the US, in particular, statutes which would extend jurisdiction to foreign nationals who have not availed themselves of American jurisdiction. These laws seek to extend the First Amendment far beyond American borders. These developments are in many ways, spiraling out of control, escalating away from a common path for resolution of the competing interests of society and personality. While a common solution might be warranted, such will be difficult given the competing priorities in the varied jurisdictions. The paper also reviews the potential solutions for standards that will satisfy these priorities. [less ▲]

From where are they Casting Stones? – Determining Jurisdiction in Online Defamation Claims

in Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology (2012)

The question of international jurisdiction in defamation cases is long running. On the EU level, Regulation 44/2001 provides that in matters relating to defamation, the court where the defendant is ... [more ▼]

The question of international jurisdiction in defamation cases is long running. On the EU level, Regulation 44/2001 provides that in matters relating to defamation, the court where the defendant is domiciled, as well as the court for the place where the harmful event occurred or may occur, are competent to hear the case. However, national courts struggled to apply traditional concepts that exist in the offline world to online matters. In its recent judgment in C-509/09 (eDate Advertising GmbH) and C-161/10 (Martinez) on the interpretation of place of the harmful event, the ECJ held that a multiplicity of possible fora exists for online defamation. Besides the connecting factors developed in C-68/93 (Shevill), the Court adapted a supplementary connecting factor: the centre of interests. Based on the opinion of the AG in joined cases C-509/07 and C-161/10 and an analysis of national case law, this paper calls for a test of objective relevance rather than a mere subjective interpretation of forum conveniens. [less ▲]

Internationale gerichtliche Zuständigkeit bei Persönlichkeitsverletzungen im Internet

in Taeger, Jürgen (Ed.) Die Welt im Netz - Folgen für Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft (2011)