« Defenseless Victims: Germany's Lax Justice Sets Child-Rapists Free to Strike Again and Again | Main | Upcoming Conference at Harvard »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Zaungast

Btw, Andrew, what is the difference in antitrust legislation and persecution between Europe and the US?

I wasn't aware that there is any big divide, or actually that there can be any big dispute in terms of underlying principles.

Zaungast

I'm very much in favor of the European - or I'd rather put: Continental - approach that protection of individuals may take higher priority than freedom of speech. And I do support the application of this principle to online content and activities.

But as far as the recent ECJ decision is concerned, I can only say: What the heck?

They declared that EU citizens still have a claim to some (limited) level of control over material about themselves publicly available online, in particular over whether it is (still being) published. Fine, so far I can follow and I endorse the idea. Looking for an analogue to the offline world, which is often helpful, we find this would correspond to banning a newspaper or TV show from dispersing a certain information, claim, or picture in the future. Nobody can change past issues of a newspaper retroactively, but old online sources are still considered here, too; I agree because leaving them on a web server somewhat resembles issuing a new edition of that old paper every day (even if the online material it is, in fact, a newspaper article obviously published long ago).

But where does this stop? How do you define what you can request to be deleted/unlinked?
Why doesn't the Court stress the underlying principles that may lead to such a decision even in a press release? I'm pretty sure the BGH or BVerfG would have done so.
Moreover, I see that search engines (in case there is a plural to that word) also bear some responsibility; but how come we now focus on Google rather than the actual publisher or the respective material?
What about way-back machines/internet archives?

Sadly, this is not the first time that the ECJ causes more uncertainty than it contributes to a reliable legal framework. Does this indicate a cultural difference between German understanding of law and the majority within the current composition of the court, or are the judges just doing a lousy job?

I'm very concerned that strategic requests for deletion will soon become an industrial machinery, just like wiki manipulation has.

And on a completely unrelated note, I still wonder what Gerhard Schröder's natural hair color might be.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Books I've written or translated

List
www.flickr.com
Andrew Hammel's items Go to Andrew Hammel's photostream
My Photo

Search German Joys

  • Google

    andrewhammel.typepad.com