P2P Pre-Settlement Letters In Germany May Have Been Illegal; Lawyer Who Reveals This Threatened With Lawsuit

from the extortion-or-not... dept

There have been plenty of legal questions over the activities of a small group of companies in Europe, including law firm Davenport Lyons, ACS:Law, Logistep and Digiprotect among others -- who all seem to work together to purposely put files online that they have licensed, and then send threat letters to the owner of any IP address that connects to them. This leads to a fair number of totally bogus demands for people to pay up to avoid getting sued. Apparently, the business is quite profitable, even as no actual lawsuits have been filed.

Yet, now reader Dan alerts us to the news that, at least in Germany, the pre-settlement letters and relationships between these companies may be entirely illegal. This was discovered due to a recently leaked document -- the one that showed how profitable all this was -- which also noted that the relationships between the various companies were not based on any direct monetary exchange:

The document states that "the whole project is kind of a joint venture where no party charges the other party with any costs." The problem with such a set-up is that the pre-settlement offers are usually based on costs incurred by retaining a law office to pursue the claim. File sharers are asked to pay 450 bucks for a porn movie because it costs money to investigate their IP address and send them the cease and desist letter.

However, German law specifically states that these costs can't be based on the success of the claim. In other words: In order to invoice file sharers for lawyer fees, these fees have to occur and be paid by someone no matter whether a file sharer pays up or not. Invoicing someone for costs that haven't actually occurred could be seen as fraud.

Oops. After a German lawyer, Thomas Stadler, reviewed all this and posted his analysis saying that the efforts in Germany were clearly illegal under German law (Google translation from the original) , the German lawyer who had sent the original document (the leaked one, detailing how these operations worked), Udo Kornmeier sent him a cease-and-desist letter (again, Google translation from the original), demanding he take down his blog post that showed the whole operation was illegal. Apparently, lawyers who may be breaking the law in Germany don't like other lawyers exposing them...

Filed Under: germany, legality, pre-settlement letters
Companies: acs:law, davenport lyons, digiprotect, logistep

Convicted German Murderer Wants His Conviction Erased From Wikipedia

from the bit-of-a-conflict... dept

EFF has the bizarre story of a convicted murderer in Germany who is demanding that Wikipedia censor all mentions of the guy's name. Apparently, he (and his lawyers) are using a part of German law that allows for the protection of "names and likenesses of private persons from unwanted publicity." However, as the EFF points out, he's not a private person. He became a very public person when he was tried and convicted (along with his half-brother) for killing Bavarian actor Walter Sedlmayr. Apparently, his lawyers are going after multiple service providers, trying to get the guy's name taken off the internet. The EFF points out that the press has published the two convicted murderers' names for Sedlmayr's death: Wolfgang Werle and his half-brother Manfred Lauber, and that this appears to be nothing more than an attempt to censor history across multiple borders.

Filed Under: free speech, germany, murder
Companies: wikipedia

German Chancellor Proposes Special 'Save Newspapers' Copyright Law

from the yeah,-that'll-work dept

It's beginning to look like German Chancellor Angela Merkel believes the entire point of copyright is not to provide incentive to create, but as a way to hurt Google and protect obsolete local businesses. Last month, we wrote about her complaints concerning the Google book project (where she conveniently left out the fact she had tried to fund the European equivalent). And, now, her party has proposed creating a special new copyright law just for old school news organizations. There aren't many specifics, other than they want to protect news organizations, and this odd claim:

"The Internet cannot be a copyright-free zone."

The thing is, it's not a "copyright-free" zone. But what the internet has shown is that if you put in place dumb copyright laws that do no more than to prop up business models, people will route around them. That's even more likely to occur if Merkel and her colleagues create a special "protect newspapers" copyright.

The article suggests that the likely proposal would involve "neighboring rights," which are found in some other areas of copyright law -- and would require that the original creator of the content give some kind of permission before any commercial use of the work. So, in theory, any "commercial" aggregator could only aggregate and link to stories from which it has received explicit permission. In other words, it would effectively break the basic premise of the web by not allowing you to summarize and link where you would like.

Not surprisingly, newspaper and magazine publishers in Germany are all for it, though they might want to think twice about that. Just wait until one of their competitors breaks a story, and they're unable to talk about it without "permission." Meanwhile, plenty of people who actually have put some thought into this realize that the "commercial/non-commercial" line is not clear at all. Is a personal blogger who puts up some basic ads on his or her site (even if they earn pennies) a "commercial enterprise"? And what about Google News, which doesn't have ads on the European version of Google News (it only recently put ads on the US version)?

On the whole, this sounds like someone decided they wanted to "help out" the major media companies, but without anyone putting much thought into the actual details or inevitable consequences of such a law. A more cynical person might suggest that this proposal is really designed to gain the current ruling party a bit of support from the mainstream press in Germany...

Filed Under: angela merkel, copyright, germany, journalism

Now Google's Facing A Criminal Investigation In Germany Over Copyrights On YouTube

from the oh-geeze dept

Hopefully, this leads nowhere, but NewTeeVee reports that an angry entertainment lawyer in Germany has filed a criminal complaint against YouTube for music from 25 musicians he represents. The complaint is that Google hasn't taken down the videos and hasn't allowed those artists access to the Content ID program that Google uses to try to block copyrighted works. It's not clear why these artists weren't allowed in. Google seems to deny the whole thing. Either way, it's not at all clear why this should be a criminal investigation rather than a civil lawsuit, as that's all there is (at best) here. There's apparently a half decent chance that German officials will eventually decide that as well, telling the lawyer to file a civil suit instead, but just the fact that a criminal investigation has begun is troubling enough.

Meanwhile, part of the complaint is that this lawyer wants to find out who uploaded the videos, presumably to sue them too, because we all know what works great these days for musicians is to sue their biggest fans, who are out there trying to help promote the musicians they love....

Filed Under: copyright, criminal, germany
Companies: google, youtube

German Chancellor Against Google Book Project... Leaves Out That Germany Tried Funding A Competitor

from the just-saying... dept

German Chancellor Angela Merkel got plenty of attention over the weekend for speaking out against the Google Book settlement, making some odd claims that suggest she's not particularly familiar with what the debate is actually about:

"The German government has a clear position: copyrights have to be protected in the Internet," Merkel said, adding there are "considerable dangers" for copyright protection in the Internet.

"That's why we reject the scanning in of books without any copyright protection -- like Google is doing. The government places a lot of weight on this position on copyrights to protect writers in Germany."

But... what Google's doing is not about scanning books "without any copyright protection." That's a fabrication. Hell, even a German court ruled that Google's book scanning project doesn't violate copyright. You would think that Merkel would be familiar with rulings in her own country. Separately, it seems worth noting that at one point, Germany was heavily involved in Quearo, a European project that was originally designed to compete with Google's book scanning project. While Germany eventually dropped out of that program, it's difficult to claim that Merkel is an unbiased party in this matter, as her government at least initially supported a project to compete with Google in scanning books.

Filed Under: angela merkel, book scanning, copyright, europe, germany

Old Music Conference Shuts Down, Blames 'Piracy'; New, Better Event Shows Up Instead

from the bottom-up dept

This is really great. Wolfgang Senges writes in to update us on how a group of passionate people who believe in a more bottom up approach to reinventing the music industry were able to put together a fantastic looking music conference in just weeks, called all2gethernow (disclosure: they asked me to come and present, but I was unable to make it). The story behind the event is that Popkomm, one of the bigger recording industry events, held in Germany each year, was canceled this year, with the guy behind it blaming "piracy" rather than, say, the economy and structural changes in the industry. A bunch of folks in Germany who knew better decided to show Popkomm's organizers how to organize a better event these days, and scrambled, pulling together a fun-looking event to be held at the exact same time as Popkomm had originally been scheduled. I'm sorry I couldn't attend, as it really looks like it should be an excellent event. Either way, it shows not only how events can work, but how the whole industry is shifting. The top-down model is changing, and the bottom up one, where more people are empowered, is taking over.

Filed Under: all2gethernow, conference, germany, music, popkomm

Consumer Advocates In Germany Helping Those Accused Of File Sharing

from the getting-help dept

It looks like the concerns over copyright holders taking advantage of people online in Germany by doing things like sending threatening letters based on weak evidence, or even putting up their own files to try to find file sharers is worrying some consumer advocates. A consumer advocacy group in the country is now promising to help those who get such pre-settlement letters to respond to them while protecting their rights. It's good to see more people recognizing that at least some of these organizations appear to be taking advantage of the ability to send legalistic letters.

Filed Under: consumer advocates, file sharing, germany

Are Copyright Holders Seeding Own Files To Find, Sue Downloaders?

from the a-bit-of-a-twist dept

Last year, we talked about some language in a contract being used by a company that was supposedly trying to help copyright holders track down content being shared online, for the purpose of sending out threatening "pre-settlement" letters. The contract appeared to indicate that the copyright holders were giving the tracking company permission to put their works on file sharing programs, for the sake of "catching" people downloading the content:

To achieve the purpose outlined in clause 1, LICENSOR grants DIGIPROTECT the exclusive right to make the movies listed in Appendix 1 worldwide available to the public via remote computer networks, so-called peer-2-peer and internet file sharing networks such as e-Donkey, Kazaa, Bitorrent, etc. for the duration of this agreement

This seemed highly questionable. Considering that this was in association with a law firm that had been known to send out a large number of these pre-settlement demand letters, but never filed a lawsuit, one could make an argument that the companies had worked out quite a system: purposely put your own content online, watch who downloads it, then send threatening letter demanding payment. Of course, there were denials all around, and people insisted that this sort of language was really only necessary so the tracking company could download the content themselves.

And yet... Michael Scott points us to a lawsuit in Germany that indicates someone may be using this very trick. It's unclear from the writeup if this is the same company (probably not), but a guy who's been accused not just of copyright infringement, but a criminal charge of distributing pornography, is claiming this is what happened to him. His explanation is rather compelling. He claims that he was using a modded version of file sharing software that did not allow upload capability. In doing so, it means that he never distributed anything (which might make the "distribution" charge pretty hard to prove). But, of course, if he never shared anything, then how would his IP address get flagged? The only real option is that whoever he downloaded it from provided the IP address back to the copyright holder -- or was the copyright holder itself.

Of course... if that's the case, one could make a pretty strong argument that the content itself was also authorized, since it was put up on the file sharing network by the copyright holder. And, on top of all this, the guy claims that the files he downloaded had misleading titles, and he didn't intend to download pornography. Whether or not you believe any of that (or his intentions), it certainly suggests that at least some content owners may be putting their own content up in order to catch downloaders and hit them with lawsuits or settlement letters. It's difficult to see how that's legal.

Filed Under: copyright, germany, seeding

German Judge: If Sex While Driving Is Legal, Why Isn't Driving While Phoning?

from the those-deep-philosophical-questions dept

Six years ago, we noted in passing that a court ruling found that driving while having sex is perfectly legal in Germany (separately, it's apparently a popular practice in Russia). Part of the point was in discussing the troubling trend to try to pick off each and every "distraction" to outlaw -- and it seems like a judge in Germany is wondering the same thing. The judge, issuing a fine for a driver talking on his cell phone, started questioning whether it was legal at all to fine drivers for talking, noting how many other driver distractions were perfectly legal -- including sex, masturbation, shaving, changing the radio station and others. The judge isn't necessarily saying it's good to do those things (in fact, he notes the opposite), but he's questioning the constitutionality of banning just one of many distractions, and has apparently sent the issue to Germany Constitutional Court to examine the issue.

Filed Under: driving, driving distractions, germany, sex, talking

German Green Party Pushes File Sharing Legalization Tax

from the an-idea-no-one-likes dept

It seems like an idea almost no one likes. Many users are against the idea of needing to pay a tax for file sharing they don't do, and the recording industry hates any idea that "legalizes" file sharing. And yet, the Green Party in Germany seems to be pushing forward with an idea to legalize personal file sharing via a special tax users would pay via their ISP bill. Apparently the plan would involve paying different amounts based on the speed of your internet connection, which seems a bit bizarre. What does the speed necessarily have to do with how much file sharing you do? Oh yeah, the other problem? No one seems to have any idea how to distribute the proceeds of such a tax.

Filed Under: file sharing, germany, green party, tax