Twitter Cuts Off Illegal Neo Nazi Group Account In Germany
from the censor-locally dept
Back in January, we wrote about Twitter's decision to set up tools to allow it to censor locally if required to under local laws. While many people got upset about this, believing it meant that Twitter was supporting censorship, we noted that the issue is a bit more nuanced than that. You could take the extreme position that Twitter should stand up for free speech absolutely, no questions asked, anywhere around the world. And, to some extent, I'm sympathetic to that viewpoint. However, at the same time, it is a fact that different countries have different laws, and some of those laws restrict free speech. Twitter's decision, then, is a compromise on that, but in a somewhat more effective way. They will only block the content in that specific country where it has been deemed illegal.And, now, nine months later, Twitter's General Counsel Alex Macgillivray (@amac), has admitted to using the censorship ability for the first time, for the account of a neo-Nazi group based in Germany, where it has been declared illegal. The block only applies to Germany. As some have noted, this is a really bad group. But, of course, it's always those kinds of cases that test your principles. As promised, Twitter has publicly shared the takedown letter it received on ChillingEffects.
Dear Madam, Dear Sir,This is the kind of thing that Twitter absolutely expected -- and the fact that is only banning the account in Germany, rather than following the demands of the letter ordering the account be shutdown completely, suggests that Twitter isn't just caving in here. Of course, given my strong belief in the importance of free speech, I think that the demand to shut down the account itself is the bigger issue here, rather than Twitter's reaction to it. In ordering it shut down, and leading to this public admission about it from Twitter, all that German law enforcement has done is call more attention to this group.
the enclosed letter gives you the information that the Ministry of the Interior of the State of Lower-Saxony in Germany has banned the organisation "Besseres Hannover". It is disbanded, its assets are seized and all its accounts in social networks have to be closed immediately. The Public Prosecutor (State Attorney's Office) has launched an investigation on suspicion of forming a criminal association.
It is the task fo the Polizeidirektion Hannover (Hannover Police) to enforce the ban.
The organisation "Besseres Hannover" uses the Twitter account
besseres-hannover@hannoverticker
https://twitter.com/hannoverticker
I ask you to close this account immediately and not to open any substitute accounts for the organisation "Besseres Hannover".
Please confirm that you have received this letter and let me know what measures you have taken.
Yours sincerely,
[signature]
Head of Police Admin Dept
Also, I'd take some issue with Amac's claim that this is the "first time" the company has used its ability to "withhold content." It has done so repeatedly in the past over DMCA claims. Yes, that's somewhat different, but not as much as some would like to believe. Both are cases where the local law claims that the content in question is illegal, and upon notices sent to Twitter, it blocks that content. That makes no statement on whether or not such content should or should not be illegal. But the basics of the situation are really the same.
Either way, I appreciate that Twitter is at least trying to walk the fine line of both complying with the laws in countries like Germany, while simultaneously effectively demonstrating why such laws don't necessarily work well. I can certainly understand why Germany has laws against neo-Nazis and hate groups. Given the history there, it's hard to imagine such laws not existing. But situations like this raise questions about just how effective they really are. In this case, all it's really done is call more attention to the group in question. As for Twitter, you could argue that the company could go much further, but it would clearly run into significant legal challenges. And, while it would be great if it also recognized that the DMCA notice situation really isn't all that different, it's difficult to fault Twitter for deciding this particular battle wasn't worth fighting against.
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
Filed Under: free speech, germany
Companies: twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
There is absolutely no excuse for censoring them like this as it is a fundamental breach of freedom of speech.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If the German government doesn't censor unpopular opinions, they run the risk of slipping into a fascist dictatorship!
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The idea that there are laws on the books in Germany which force Twitter to censor assholes simply because an exponentially larger German asshole killed millions of people, but Germany wants to pretend that never happened, is fucking stupid. Sorry, Germany, but Hitler is damn well part of your history. Outlawing fascist speech, outlawing Mein Kampf, and all the rest may be well-intentioned, but it will only do the opposite of what you expect.
It will embolden the hateful while also turning them into something of a victim. Worse, younger generations may not get the full scope and picture of what happened historically, thus perhaps causing history to repeat itself rather than all of us learning the lessons of the past.
So, the enemy hear really isn't Twitter. It's Germany. Again. It's crime is trying to obfuscate the fact that its people, two generations ago, killed millions of people. Too bad, they did. Get over it. Most of the rest of the world has. Your turn.
I propose we launch IW1 (Internet War 1) against the ironically fascist German government aim to obfuscate their past. Speech should be as free or more free in Germany as it is in America. Mein Kampf should NOT be censored, but understood for the idiotic hate-shit that it is, which requires reading the idiotic hate-shit inside of it.
IW1: This Time, It's Only Kind of Personal....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
American society considers everyone to be basically a good person, but a little bit dumb.
German society considers everyone to be basically an intelligent person, but a little bit evil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can, too.
One of the huge lessons of the holocaust that most people miss is that there was nothing special about the German character that made it possible. It literally can happen in just the same way in any nation on Earth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You obviously don't know much about Germany. Every German learns about WW2 and the Nazis in school. And not just in history classes. They have to read literature about WW2/Holocaust in German classes, talk about it in religion/ethics/philosophy classes, go to museums, watch documentaries, visit concentration camps and memorial sites, etc.. Public broadcasting stations show documentaries about all aspects of WW2 all the time. There are memorials for Nazi victims everywhere in this country. You get to hear so much about this stuff that it comes out of your ears. Every German citizen knows what happened back then and nobody (except some neo Nazi groups) tries to hide the terrible things that happened back then. So saying that Germany tries to pretend it never happens is far from reality.
"...outlawing Mein Kampf..."
It's not outlawed or banned. The government of Bavaria confiscated Hitler's property including his copyrights after his death and they use these copyrights to prevent publishers from reprinting the book. But it's perfectly legal to own, buy and sell copies of the book.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That said, the restriction of speech by certain groups as a result of their past is still a symptom of what I was discussing....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet you rail for years over taking down a baby dance video!
This IS political speech, but you give Twitter a pass, as always for a corporation. I just note the correlation here, don't exactly disagree with THIS one, either...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet you rail for years over taking down a baby dance video!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet you rail for years over taking down a baby dance video!
Well, except in the case of copyright. /sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet you rail for years over taking down a baby dance video!
You could argue that the proper response would be to stand up to local governments and say, "sorry, we don't block anything" -- and I'd actually have sympathy with that response. But the truth is that if a government is demanding censorship, then Twitter is likely going to have to comply or face complete blocking.
This is from the linked article
Seems you are incapable of having a nuanced discussion and not attack Mike at every single post. A pity, it seems you could contribute if you put some effort.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet you rail for years over taking down a baby dance video!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet you rail for years over taking down a baby dance video!
You are comparing apples and oranges. We don't fault companies for following the law. We fault those who use the law in stupid ways in both cases.
In the dancing baby case, we don't fault YouTube for complying with the takedown, but we do fault UMG for issuing it (also, last I checked, UMG is a corporation, which blows your idiotic theory out of the water).
In this case, we don't fault Twitter for complying with the law, but do fault the German government for using the law in an ineffective way.
There is no contradiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pre-Internet thinking seeping through
But it is not Twitter which opens accounts; it is the users, via the automated account registration form.
This seems to be a leftover from the pre-Internet world, where to open an account you had to talk to a clerk. In that world, that request made sense; Twitter would tell all its clerks: "do not open any accounts for these guys". But in the Internet world, there are no clerks to judge each application.
A request which would make more sense would be "[...] and close any newly opened substitute accounts for the organisation [...]"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pre-Internet thinking seeping through
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You know what would be nice ?
But then I'd also like not to have to sit through those stupid "The FBI is coming to get you" warnings when the FBI doesn't have jurisdiction here...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You know what would be nice ?
As if that's stopped the US before...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't know, it just feels like there is a bit of cognitive dissonance going on here, and it feels like the skin colour of the subject plays and important role.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I am against censorship, both with regards to Nazis and terrorists equally. Note also that saying these groups should be able to speak is light years away from being sympathetic to what they're saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jurisdiction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Jurisdiction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Jurisdiction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]