Slashdot Mirror
German Constitutional Court Blocks Napster Suit
djmutex writes "In an urgent ruling, the German Constitutional Court has temporarily blocked the Napster copyright violations class action of several American recording companies and artists against Bertelsmann. The court decided that the German court in Düsseldorf, which was, according to international conventions, required to serve the writ, may not do so until the Constitutional Court has checked that the suit does not violate Bertelsmann's rights granted by the German constitution. Since, according to those agreements, the service is a precondition for both the suit to proceed in the U.S. as well as the later acceptance of the U.S. ruling in Germany, the lawsuit is for now halted. It is unclear when the Constitutional Court will definitely decide, but it is not generally famed for its tempo on final rulings, and it also stated in the press release (in German) that constitutional rights could possibly be violated if "proceedings before state courts are obviously abused to discipline competitors through public media pressure and the risk of a conviction"." Reuters has a summary.
Erm - isn't Napster supposed to have died by now?
Bash script for FP whores
German Court sides with German company in suit against American company. Wow, what a shock.
I have not read the article, but I will declare victory for free speech. I will also make a vague jab at the DMCA, and express my deep-seated hatred for the evil RIAA.
Even though I don't speak German and I have no understanding of how the legal system works in Germany, I'll act like I know what I'm talking about when I make my ridiculously uninformed comment.
Who would have thought that the German constitution has had this law suit thrown out of court and protect a company while blatantly created a program for copyright violation, while the US constitution allows a collage student to be sued for his life savings by the RIAA for simply creating a search engine.
There is no god
I don't get it.
If anyone, the US labels should be class action sued for obstructing Napster's business model.
Bertelsmann bought Napster when they were already dead. What merit could there possibly be in this lawsuit?
Also: why is this a class action lawsuit?
If Bertelsmann buys a US company which violates US copyrights then Bertelsmann should submit to US law. If they don't like this, then they shouldn't do any business in the US.
If an american corporation does business with a foreign company which violates foreign law, then that american company should submit to foreign law. If they don't like this, then they shouldn't do any business with foreign organisations.
GPL May Not Work In German Legal System, but also this news.
The German legal system is refreshingly weird, unlike the American legal system.
Well, it seems like yet another of our technological networking freedoms is being quashed by the state. Seriously, why do we need to have another form of communication censored? If these mechanisms such as email and the W3 client/server system weren't a problem back in the 1950s, 1960s and 1980s, what is the problem with them now? Does anyone genuinely believe that there were somehow through some twist of fate absolutely no music file sharers back when Ritchie and Thompson wrote UNIX in PDP-3 assembler? Why do we need to have HTTP, FTP, P2P, SMTP, LRP and YQP regulated by outside bodies? When did we need to eliminate selfpolicing?
The Internet was founded on the propogation of information as freely as possible. This means that Web surfing, Usenet threads and MP3 files are all equally valuable and important, and removing free peer-to-peer filesharign services would remove the infrastructure of one of the Internet's most fundamental protocols. Though it is true that some P2P users are fly-by-night peculiars such as trolls and paedos, we have to understand that they provide a service not unlike those of coin-operated telephone boxes and stamp-operated postal services, and that vigorously spying on free email users is tantamount to removing phone and mail boxes or tapping them.
Besides, keeping an eye on P2P software won't reduce the problem. If broadband pirates and spammers are determinted to get their messages through, then they can just use encryption, or the Freenet protocol to make them untraceable - or both, in which case nothing can be done. Public key encryption algorithm implementations such as RSA, DES and Freenet mean that the RIAA would reqire upwards of 30,000 manhours per OGG Vorbis file to discover inappropriate content; despite being impossible, this is still a flagrant violation of our privacy rights!
In addition to this, by carrying out these actions the police are effectively stating that paid-for music download accounts are in some way superior to those not sponsored. While they may be superior, there can be no way of saying that an MP3 from someone using iTunes is more reputable than one from WinMX or any other P2P user using open source software. Just because a P2P provider happents to use UNIX/Linux servers and isn't a corporation doesn't mean that they are necessarily infested with unsavoury characters.
I could continue, but I think that with more than a cursory notice the other multitudinous incarnadine problems with this new system become clear, and we must make sure that these plans do not become widespread. Fortunately, they are quite impractical, so a few negative anecdotes should encourage most middle managers in service providers and tech support to avoid implementing it.
Bash script for FP whores
... it seems that the German Constitution is in favour of people and against corporations while the American one is in favour of businesses and against people....
On Second thought.... Looks like they're all the same after all.
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
The second senate of the Federal Constitutional Court forbade the court submitted damage suit of a group of US of American music author and publishing houses of the complaint guide (BF), American before US, today in the way of the provisional arrangement of the president of the higher regional court Duesseldorf for the duration of six months, at the latest up to a decision over the constitutional complaint, the Bertelsmann AG to let set in Germany. It concerns in the express procedure the following: The plaintiffs of the US-American output procedure state, the BF is in the meanwhile insolvent music exchange stock exchange "Napster" been and to that extent also for possibly copyright infringements committed by the music exchange stock exchange responsible involved. In the complaint procedure introduced as collecting complaint payment of damages at a value of 17 billion US dollar is stressed. The feed of the klageschrift is on the one hand condition for process in US American right, on the other hand one it is after German civil proceedings the condition for the later acknowledgment of the foreign judgement. The president of the higher regional court Duesseldorf granted the feed request of the plaintiffs for feed as responsible "central authority" after that Hague conventions over the feed of judicial and documents out of court abroad (HZUe) positively and issued a feed arrangement. The zustellungsversuch with the BF failed however because of nonacceptance of the document. The BF remained with their thereupon request posed for judicial decision against the feed arrangement before the higher regional court Duesseldorf without success. Hiergegen raised it in the main thing constitutional complaint. It makes an injury of its fundamental rights from art. 12 exp. 1 and art. 14 exp. 1 GG as well as from art. 2 exp. 1 GG valid. For its request for provisional legal protection it refers to the high probability of a forthcoming further zustellungsversuchs. With the feed the impairments of its fundamental right positions would occur and its business concern would negatively affect. From the reasons of the decision follows: 1. The constitutional complaint in the main thing procedure is neither inadmissibly nor obviously unfounded. The domestic legal order is not made fundamental the test yardstick for a feed after the HZUe. Exeptionally a feed request can be rejected however due to the reservation in the HZUe, if the asked state considers the feed suitable to endanger its sovereignty rights or its security. Federal Constitutional Court has decided in this connection already that the grant of legal aid does not hurt the general freedom of action in connection with the constitutional state principle by the feed of a complaint, with which requirements on punishing payment of damages are made valid after US-American right. With the fact however it remained open whether the feed of such a complaint with art. is to be agreed upon 2 exp. 1 GG in connection with the constitutional state principle, if the goal aimed at with the foreign complaint offends obviously against indispensable principles of a liberal constitutional state. If procedures before national courts in an obviously abusive way are used, in order to make with publizistischem pressure and the risk of a condemnation a market participant gefuegig, this German constitutional law could hurt. Clarifying the question, whether this border is exceeded in the available case, remains reserving the main thing procedure. This is more near implemented in the decision in detail. 2. The decision to favour of the BF is issued due to a consequence consideration. If the provisional is issued request in accordance with arrangement, although the constitutional complaint turns out unfoundedly later however than, the feed of the complaint in the way of the legal aid would have only retarded. Irreparable prejudices for the plaintiffs of US of American output procedure do not connect themselves with it recognizably. However if the decree of the provisional arrangement is omit
You know what?
I hope we'll see such rulings (even not yet definitive) more often. Media conglomerates may have bought half of America and a third of the European Parlement, they are still some people left whose jobs are to be sure that laws have to be in sync with the higest values of the constitution of their country. They is only one Supreme Court in the US, there are one in EACH country of the EU that could be a counter-power to each stupid law.
Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
Like the miranda stuff, gun possession amendement, weird law about punishing hacker/copyright infringer with more prison than a raper/thief and in some case murderer, the fact you can sue if you are in the wrong mood, 12 people which know nothing of the law , and can swallow any good discourse by defense/offense especially on "expert" debat, have to swear on the bible in court (?!) and I pass many of them.
it can all be resumed in : "different history , different culture, different law system". Do not try to understand. Accept it.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
First they oust Windows in Munich, then they do all kinds of crazy things that are good for the general public such as this. Now They're protecting people's rights. It seems like Germany is the place where all /.ers should move to. Although, then what would you complain about?
-I DDoSed your mom.
Burn at -1 !
thats like suing people who owned stock/bought service from enron/worldcom.
;p
here is the company that funded the program, that shared the file, that stole money from the artist who is now eating from the gutter.
Guess it goes without saying you shouldn't click the link in the parent post. Stupid me.
Anyone else packing up their things and moving to Germany? ;)
________________________________________________
suwain_2
I meant "refreshingly weird" as a compliment, as opposed to "who forgot to flush the toilet?!" weird, which describes the US legal system.
Who would have thought that the German constitution has had this law suit thrown out of court and protect a company while blatantly created a program for copyright violation, while the US constitution allows a collage student to be sued for his life savings by the RIAA for simply creating a search engine.
The US Constitution had nothing to do with that guy. He caved at the pressure and offered the RIAA everything in return. I bet the EFF would have backed him legally and the RIAA would have dropped the case or settled for a slap on the wrist and filtering of the search engine instead of all the guy's gil.
Also, lets not warp things out of perspective. His search engine wasn't without sin. A search engine to catalog shared files across a college campus. Yea, that has a lot more practical applications then simply warez, mp3z, and pr0n doesn't it?
I don't agree with the RIAA in their argument he was responsible for what others shared. I also don't agree with him caving in and then complaining. I doubt it would have held up in court. But we'll never know will we?
BTW. That last question was rhetorical incase you felt like answering it.
It is unclear when the Constitutional Court will definitely decide[...]
I'm a German, but since IANAL, my legalese isn't up to scratch, so I might be wrong here, but I think that in the press release it says something about a 6 month time frame:
Der Zweite Senat des Bundesverfassungsgerichts hat heute[...] der Präsidentin des Oberlandesgerichts Düsseldorf für die Dauer von sechs Monaten, längstens bis zu einer Entscheidung über die Verfassungsbeschwerde untersagt, die [...] Schadensersatzklage [..] zustellen zu lassen.
Rough translation:
"The 2nd chamber of the constitutional court today ruled that the president of the Düsseldorf court may not serve the writ for a six month time period, or at the utmost until there's been a decision about the constitutional complaint."
Now there's probably a lot been lost in the translation, but to me this sounds like the court isn't allowed to serve the writ until either the constitutional court has made a decision or 6 months have passed.
But again, IANAL and I may very well have mis-interpreted (and thus mis-translated) that part.
Jens
Paul Lansky made his first electronic music pieces in the 1970s.
What does this exactly mean, considering that Napster is history?
Wake up, people. We are in global competition and some people are NOT playing fair.
If the same applied there's a few CEO's that would face life in prison or worse.
Bribing foreign politicans could be considered an american past time.
Your criminalization bought and paid for by...
Does this mean Napster is legal in Germany?
Now is the time on Sprockets when we dance!
c-hack.com |
Napster in no way is leaglly liable for its users..
That is about like saying civilians should be shot for US astrocitires in Iraq by Us soliders..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
There are peer to peer networks for the sharing of legal music. In some cases they use digital signatures to ensure the files are legit. Here's the ones I've found so far:
- Furthur Network
-
konspire[2b]
-
Monotonik's BitTorrents - zip files with ~300 MB of MP3s
If you know of any others please let me know.Request your free CD of my piano music.
The very fact that shareholders cannot be sued for investing in a company is one of the cornerstones of the entire world's economy.
The worst you can do to the shareholders is to sue the corporation so that it has to dissolve in bankrupcy, so that the shareholders lose their investment.
There are only a few ways to "pierce the corporate veil". One of those is for the corporation to not pay its taxes. If the corporation does that, the tax authorities can levy the money from the personal assets of anyone with a fiduciary interest in the corporation.
There are other ways the corporate veil can be pierced, which all more or less involve the attempt to use the corporation as an attempt to protect yourself from being prosecuted for illegal activity.
IANAL, but I own a corporation, and I'm pretty sure no form of civil tort provides for piercing the corporate veil.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
You must have gotten something wrong about germany ...
http://blog.gauner.org - just a blog
why not use some a few of the html tags, like
, that is just below the Preview button?
I think you never met any German.
Wow. Talk about missing the fucking point.
This is me while i fight against Napster.
Ahh, just awesome. I'm surprised anti-german sentiment didn't come up earlier. We're still all Nazis, right ?
I bet you're from Oklahoma.
To clear up some stuff, this ruling has very little or nothing to do with legality of P2P services. It is about the huge amount of sums companies have to pay others for doing things out of contract. In the US, comps have to pay huge amounts to individuals or other comps as a FINE for what they have been doing which exceeds the damage by far. This is not possible in Germany. You have to proof that there has been a DAMAGE for you, and you have this DAMAGE repaid only. Now, this is what you have to understand to understand the ruling. Below I will roughly translate what our constitutional court said : The country court in Duesseldorf is not allowed to hand in the charge against Bertelmann until further notice. The charge, handed in by Bertelsmann rivals EMI and Universal for 17 Million Dollars MIGHT be against fundamental basics of our justice system. To stop the charge being overhanded, this INTERIM order has been made. The very high amount to get money beyond your damages is not GENERALLY against our constitution. But if trials in front of german courts are misused in an obvious way to gather public attention and press coverage and the risk of being sentenced to make the opponent give in, this might break the german constituion. Wether this has been the case THIS TIME, if to be cleared in the MAIN TRIAL. If this question is answered yes, the charge is not allowed in germany and german courts can't deal with it. Bertelsmann sees itself endangered in it's by the constitution granted rights of possesion and freedom of occupation. Hope this clears it up a bit George
...constitutional rights could possibly be violated if "proceedings before state courts are obviously abused to discipline competitors through public media pressure and the risk of a conviction".
:-)
Now, if that isn't a neat description of the whole SCO strategy, I don't know what is. If ony SCO had filed in Germany, we'd have their assess
If I spoke German, and could tell where the original breaks were, I'd have gladly put them in. On the google translation page, if I used the http:// function, it just kicked back the page title. I had to paste the story into the text area, which stripped the breaks off. Sorry to have ruined your day...dude.
You know what?
If your so damn proud of the post why did you post as an AC?
Why did I just post as an AC? Because I don't want my name associated with this conversation.
... you all know coypright infringment is theft, so whey r u complaining??
The freedom is a very essential part of any civilized Constitution. Because it's to protect everyone's rights. The patent/copyright law is to protect only a small group of people. Regrarding P2P, RAAA uses the law in a very wrong way - to punish a whole freedom of exchanging the information just only for a misareable chance to kick someone who is using P2P to violate IP laws.
I am very happy that the German court doesn't kiss Bush's ass and decided to look at the problem independently from any US pressure. Go Germany! I hope other European countries will follow the same way.
Less is more !
I don't think us Oklahoman's are going to forget what you Nazi bastards did over in Nam' anytime soon! You killed my Paw' and brother Otis, until you Nazis repeant to the Lord Jesus Chirst for your sins I can't look the other way (which way would that be btw?)! Shit, I'm missing hee-haw!! til next time you Nazis pig!
J.D. Tucker,
Proud Citizen of the Confederate State of Oklahoma
This isn't about napster, it is about EMI and Universal using napster and demanding ridiculous amounts of money to put pressure on Bertelsman. Then they'd probably go for some kind of settlement which has nothing to do with napster at all.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
The american legal system allows to demand ridiculous sums of money, also there's this weird case-law which to my understanding means, that one wrong decision in one court has to be repeated by every other american court, and also that lawyers have to consider not only the given law but any case which might have some remote similarities to the case at hand.
In this case the german court halted the process to decide first if it is constitutional to put a competitor under pressure by demanding the unusually high sums the US-system allows for.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
So a German court stops a German corporation from having to send $$$ to the US?
Does anyone think the US courts are going to let a US corp get sued by a German group and have to send $$$ to Germany?
Get Real.
i've been to germany, and i've been to the US. while germany still has a few nationalists, neither their number nor their jingoism comes even close to what you routinely can see in the US
note to US citizens and residents: i am well aware that not all americans are like this idiot
Paul Lansky's pieces were electronic. But they were not digital. Nor did they use computers.
I should point out that rap artists have already faced this problem, and they had to pay. According to American law, if you make a collage, that is a derivative work, and you still have to pay royalties.
Okay, here's what you do. Paste into the text box. Whereever there is a break, put an ! instead of a period.
Now, go back, and do a find-replace on the results, substituting ! with (p).
Once you've done that, it will look halfway decent, and we'll get back to criticizing you for putting in page breaks, and thus obviously earning karma points, which make us Anonymous Cowards green with envy.
The american legal system allows to demand ridiculous sums of money, also there's this weird case-law which to my understanding means, that one wrong decision in one court has to be repeated by every other american court, and also that lawyers have to consider not only the given law but any case which might have some remote similarities to the case at hand.
In case (and I know this is a stretch) you're actually interested: America has what is called "common law" (like Britain, Canada, Australia, India, and other places of common governmental origin), which consists of both legislatively-passed laws and the great mass of previously decided legal cases (case law). The "law" consists of both together. (Germany, conversely, has a different system called "civil law", which most European countries use.)
Courts in America are arranged in two parallel hierarchical systems, with trial courts (which hear witnesses, have juries, etc.) at the bottom, and appeals courts (which carefully interpret the law) at the top. The parallel systems are the federal and state courts (50 different state court systems), and each has their own specific areas of authority, or jurisdictions.
Courts simply have to follow the decision of anybody above them in the hierarchy - the more "senior" courts. They don't have to follow the decisions of anybody in a parallel system, or anybody below them, or anybody at an equal level. They may be interested in reading their opinions to help them decide, but they don't have to follow them.
So, to summarize: there is no one "American legal system" - there are at least fifty-one, and which one you're in depends upon what kind of controversy it is. And "one wrong decision" does not have to be followed by every other court - only by those who have to obey it.
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
while germany still has a few nationalists, neither their number nor their jingoism comes even close to what you routinely can see in the US
Well, to be fair, we and the Britons and the Canadians and the Russians killed all theirs in 1939-1945.
ASA
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
Wow, I haven't laughed at a Slashdot post for a long time...
May we never see th
Well, to be fair, we and the Britons and the Canadians and the Russians killed all theirs in 1939-1945.
No you didn't. Thats why we still have those neonazis.
It's all your fault!
"I seem to have mastered a certain amount of control over physical reality."
WTF does this bullshit have to do with the topic of this discussion?
Fuck off, you Troll!
Anyone else see this whole lawsuit as step in the right direction. To me it seems that "the soldiers are fighting among themselves in the trenches". EMI and Universal suing Bertellsman, maybe the RIAA affiliates can sue each other into oblivian.
The RIAA's Days are numbered. They're desperate, and it's beginning to show. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if they lose one of the 911 lawsuits they've filed against uploaders, it'll be the death of them (it sets a legal precedent for a viable defense and/or dismissal). This fighting between member organizations is great. Hopefully virgin can sue columbia next, and then sony can go after time warner. How much in lawyer fees is this costing each company?
Yay for the eventual rule of the people, and Keep up the good fight
Let's get one thing perfectly clear, I did not vote for George W Bush, and I do not endorse what he does or says.
"
a legal version is supposedly on its way back before christmas 2003...should be awesome to see a great program, now being legal and for everyone to use without worrying, and its the ORIGINAL