German Court Finds Mother Liable For Kid's File Sharing, Despite Her Ban On The Practice
from the talk-about-secondary-liability dept
One of the issues we've had with the use of IP addresses as "proof" of file sharing, is that there can be many users and many computers coming from a single IP address -- and lots of times we've seen parents sued for actions of their kids or even their kids' friends. Now, under any common sense approach to the world, you would think that this would be seen as a problem. Occasionally, we've heard entertainment industry execs say that it doesn't matter, and it should be the responsibility of whoever pays for the connection to make sure it's not misused. For the most part, though, our judicial system realizes that you don't blame the wrong party.Apparently, over in Germany they feel differently. A woman, whose son apparently used file sharing programs despite the mother's explicit ban on such things, has been held responsible for the son's file sharing. The court said that simply banning her children from file sharing was not enough -- she should have actively monitored the connection. That seems like an incredible stretch -- and even makes you wonder if the judge has children.
Either way, I can see no reasonable argument for blaming a third party for someone else's actions, and it's even worse when that third party specifically told the others not to take part in the activity.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This judge doesn't have children or common sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
From now on
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Others too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parental Responsibility
It's not a case of 'who owns the connection', but that parents are held accountable for the actions of children in their care.
"Well I told him not too" wouldn't be considered much of a defence for more serious crimes, would it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
Parents have a responsibility to raise their kids within the law, not drop them on society to sort out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
Does that mean parents are now criminally liable for their children's drug use, whether they are aware of it or not, even if they tell their child not to?
At some point their has to be personal responsibility here. I challenge you to name one thing a responsible, reasonable parent should have done that this parent did not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
if any more serious action that isn't equally unenforceable hadn't been rendered illegal in this country ...
note that 'this country' is neither Germany nor the USA, just in case anyone's confused.
(seriously, if a cop wants to make your life hell, they Can run you through the courts for yanking your kid out of the way of an oncoming truck. Now, in this particularly ridiculous example, you'd win, but all it takes is sufficient vindictiveness or lack of intelligence on the part of *thinks* two or three people? and you'd still have to go through the process. government protestations to the contrary, the way it's worded you Can go to jail for abuse if you slap your kid's hand to prevent them pulling on, say, a jug cord which is currently attached to a jug full of boiling water...)
yeeeah, got off on a tangent there.
so, yeah, al, i agree with you... but if Germany's laws are anything like New Zealand's (and i seriously doubt they are, or our government would use them rather than Finland as an example of 'how to do it right' even when it doesn't work), all it takes is a kid who's not a total wimp and the parent can't do anything about it without getting in trouble that way too.
gah. this comment keeps going in circles! it has no end!
stopping now :S
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
I'd love to see a citation for that one. Personally I'm very much in favour of parents having freedom in bringing up their kids but any parent who can't deal with a jug of water without resorting to a slap doesn't get a lot of sympathy from me. Option one: move the jug of water. Don't worry, there are plenty of others that don't involve violence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
The parents were charged with with a violation of the storage of a firearm to protect minors law, not for what their child did with the gun. Big difference.
Not the same as being charged with murder,...
No, it certainly isn't. Again, big difference.
but it's still being held criminally responsible for their failure keep a minor from doing dangerous/illegal things with their property.
No, it isn't. It's being held accountable for their own violation of the law. That would have been the case regardless of the actions of their child.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
"Someone broke this law, (even if it is a bad law) who pays for it?"
The person who broke the law. Is that really so hard to understand?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parental responsibility for Civil cases vs Criminal cases.
Parents (in the US, in Germany, everywhere) have ALWAYS been legally responsible for civil damages (as determined in a civil lawsuit) for actions done by their minor children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
Isn't keeping an eye on your children 'parenting'?
This argument is full of double-standards.
When the media blames violent games for kids hurting each other, we point out that parents should control what games their kids are playing, and not ignore age restrictions.
When Government threatens legislation or net filtering to protect kids from porn and other nasty stuff they might stumble on because the parents don't understand it we say no, the parent should not be ignorant and take time to learn the technology and what their kids are doing.
Now its a Court and Filesharing, and suddenly the situation is completely reversed? The parent should bare no responsibility for what their kid is doing on the net?
I agree with the general principal that we shouldn't prosecute the owners of net connections for the actions of other people using it, but that doesn't mean parental responsibility goes away too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parental Responsibility
Well, I don't know about Germany, but I remember a case here in the US just the other day where a kid was found guilty of killing another another kid. Now we don't execute young children in the US (because of some misguided international law against such things), so we just executed the parents instead on the basis that they were "accountable for the actions of children in their care." And as it turns out, this was an 3-generation extended-family household, so the grandparents are next.
Oh, wait... that didn't happen, because (in the US at least) parents are NOT automatically accountable for the actions of their children, even if one breaks a law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parental Responsibility
And you do really need to consider the implications of blaming the parents. What if this is a foster child? Is it the state, the natural parents, or the foster parents to blame?
I'm fairly shocked that any judge would open a can of worms this big.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
Absolutely.
If kids are found to be torrenting stuff (illegally) over the school network, then the school or the person responsible for them can get into big trouble.
I'm getting a bit confused why so many people are trying to to pick holes in this; isn't it obvious?
Does common sense get thrown out the window on this blog every time someone brings up filesharing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
Giving your child a computer with an open internet connection and allowing them to use it in their bedrooms behind a closed door is just asking for trouble. The internet isn't an electronic babysitter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
You are correct. The internet is, in fact, a communications device. Like the telephone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Parental Responsibility
I would rather see a solution that encourages parents and everyone else to obey the law, but what that solution is for cases like this is unclear IMO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then if it was, taking away his computer until he stops.
It might not stop the file sharing on his part (he can go outside the home), but it might have saved this woman some trouble. I don't agree per se with the legality (need to see the details more first), but as far as "parental responsibility", she sure as hell didn't make that much of an effort. Stop acting like she was parent of they year, and did all she could. Apparently, she didn't. The legal issue is seperate, and I'll comment when I read more on that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
American Parent Liability Child's Act
Go read this and educate yourself, before your kid starts torrenting stuff. :P
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/parent-liability-child-s-act
Pay particular attention to this bit:
"A parent is liable for a child's negligent acts if the parent knows or has reason to know that it is necessary to control the child and the parent fails to take reasonable actions to do so. This legal theory is known as negligent supervision. Liability for negligent supervision is not limited to parents. Grandparents, guardians, and others with CUSTODY and control of a child may also be liable under these circumstances. There is usually no dollar limit on this type of liability. An umbrella or homeowner's insurance policy may offer the adult some protection in a lawsuit."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: American Parent Liability Child's Act
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On the other hand I agree with the comparison that parents are usually not held responsible for their children committing different types of crime, that occur "in real life". That also applies to Germany. At worst they're taken away from their parents (that happens in very rare and extreme cases) or they face youth prison if they're at least 14 years old.
But well... this court sentence is really a bit of a stretch. Unfortunately the nutjobs from the music industry have an enormous influence here and they make German wifi owners pay ridiculous fairy tale amounts of money if they can proof that some illegal activities occured through their Internet connection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what's the point?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parents should be responsible
The simple act of saying "you can't file share" is meaningless without actual supervision and enforcement, no different from "eat your peas" or "no video games in a school night". Either you enforce it, or it is meaningless.
Too may parents make the mistake of allowing internet access from the child's room or other area where they are not supervising the online activity, which allows the children to get into all sorts of trouble.
In the end, the parents need to accept their responsiblity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parents should be responsible
Yes, yes! Like copyright laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parents should be responsible
How do you expect parents to teach their children without letting them make mistakes? Or do you think that they're going to wholeheartedly listen to what their parents tell them?
How far does this go? Are parents responsible if the State issues a license to a 17 year old, who then gets into a crash? How about a 16 year old who gets his girl pregnant? Are the parents responsible for the new baby?
Do you think that parents should monitor their children 24/7, and never let them out of their sight, for fear that they might break a law?
What happens if the parent does monitor computer use at home, and the child shares files at school, at the library, on a borrowed computer, or in a computer cafe? Who's responsible then? What happens if the 16 year old purchases his own netbook and then drives his own car to Starbucks, where he uses a wireless connection to fileshare?
Is Starbucks responsible? Are the parents responsible? Or is the man-child responsible?
How culpable are the parents, anyway? In a case of abuse or neglect, both parents are responsible, even if one parent doesn't live in the home. How does this work with your concept of parental responsibility? Is it 80% culpability for the in-home parent, and 20% for the absent parent? 50/50? Or 100% on the in-home parent?
What if other adults live in the home? Are they responsible, as well? What if the other adult is elderly or an 18-year-old sibling?
What if a friend brings a laptop or netbook or smartphone into the home and uses it to fileshare? Is the parent of the friend responsible or the parent who owns the home? Or is it the person who owns the Internet connection (which may very well be the child)?
Personally, I think that the child, in this case, should be held responsible for their own actions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parents should be responsible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Parents should be responsible
It's the only life he knows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Liability
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not to mention, file sharing programs aren't illegal. Are you seriously suggesting that parents should disallow their children from using such things altogether?
There seem to be plenty of problems parents have with dealing with their children without adding the fear of liability for an act which is harmless to the list of worries. Unless of course you're seriously worried about all that pocket money the companies are losing from kids who apparently aren't old enough to be held responsible for their actions but are old enough to be targeted by advertising.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How about option 3) Educate yourself as a parent? A better response would be to have a parent educate themselves to a child's interests, technical or otherwise, and educate themselves to the best of their ability on these interests, their potential harm, and how to limit this harm, within their own ability. Nothing more, nothing less. To simply say (esentially) I took "reasonable" steps, when according to the facts at hand,the limit of such steps were not reached, is not acceptable. That is all I am pointing out. Other methods were available. I didn't say it "isn't there problem", but with no shared IP address it would be less of a legal liability, potentially.
I cannot give a legal opinion, only a layman's opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Files can be shared without trace
Thats the MOST valid point. The parent can be a great techno-geek or a FBI head and still find no trace of file-sharing in the computer. In fact this is easy with ONLINE softwares (no need for hard disc storage) and the INCOGNITO mode so lavishly brought by Chrome and then FF. Files can be even shared during chat or Google wave and thereafter be removed without trace.
In this tech background can the legal heads of any country just summarize - what are the exact steps that a parent can do ? Problem is neither the judges or the law makers were exposed to the intricacies of the net when they were child and at "old age" half-learning is dangerous and produce half baked laws. If the thing is illegal crack down on the source - that is file sharing sites or methods.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You guys forget
My father plays games on his computer all the time, but he still doesn't know the difference between server lag and capping out on bandwidth due to too much upload going on. He knew that taking away a cat5 cable from my brother would keep him from accessing the network, but not how easily replaced they are.
Do not confuse cursory knowledge on a subject with understanding. Otherwise, I'd be glad to represent you in court, because I watch Law and Order all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You guys forget
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You guys forget
But that's how the internet works, by computers sharing files.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sexting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sexting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sexting?
Yes, and if you're responsible for it, you can be prosecuted for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Teach the judge
[ link to this | view in chronology ]