German Killers Sue Wikipedia To Remove Their Names

Jason Levine writes "Wolfgang Werlé and Manfred Lauber killed a German actor in 1990. Now that they are out of prison, German law states that they can't be referred to by name in relation to the killings. Therefore, they have sued to get Wikipedia to remove their names from the Wikipedia article about the killings. The German edition of Wikipedia has already complied, but the English edition is citing US freedom of speech and a lack of presence in Germany as reasons why they don't need to remove the name. In a bit of irony, their lawyer e-mailed the NY Times: 'In the spirit of this discussion, I trust that you will not mention my clients' names in your article.'"

Comments

Freedom of Speech

[Reality Master 101]

And THIS is why the Internet needs to remain under United States control. Out imperfections notwithstanding, the United States is one of the only countries that can be trusted to understand what Freedom of Speech means. (Not that there aren't certain elements that try and water it down, but at least it's codified at the strongest level of law).

Re:Freedom of Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet you seem to be so brainwashed to be anti-US. Strange, given that here these are Germans trying to enforced their laws in the US, a situation that if it were vice versa is something Europeans in general have argued against, with vitriol and sheer anti-Americanism. Nations and people have bad steps, we simply tend to correct ourselves quicker, and with the exception of perhaps the UK, we certainly remember our friends more than they remember us.

There are nearly no government with no agenda and with resources to enforce no agenda. Even attempts at a higher plane of government or oversight, such as with the EU expanding over the European nations and beyond, or the World Court, and certainly with the UN, it's degraded worse to anything seen in the US if you analyze the info over a decade number (instead of the sheer knee-jerk short term). People now generally "hate" the US because it's the new thing to hate that which is on top (and having a US President that's puts our nation forward as week, and who is continually apologetic is pathetic). The US has it's problems, but we often solve them because of dialogue and a faster and mixed voting cycle (2/4/6year/life terms in our national government).

"If it were under US control,"

If it is or isn't is a matter of debate, but what is certainly true is, within our borders, we can have complete control and we certainly have the resources to completely lock out such sites. And yet, strangely, we haven't done this. In fact, on occasion, we have in criminal cases, but in a general sweep, we've never attempted in any focused or broad attempt.

Compare that to the Australian government which regulates video game publication because of gore (and your internet access is still a joke, even if Obama wants to look at your "system"), German's with free speech issues and now this, the UK with over reaching surveillance, etc. The only country that comes to mind that is modern and seems to have their act together to potentially handle internet control and doesn't seem to piss me off is New Zealand, and New Zealand may not have the resources or political clout to remain more neutral if given that burden. The US lacks the will, we have freer speech underpinnings, and we don't really care either, really, about internet control.

I think people look to anything contrary to their political or personal ends and go off the wall as why the whole system is rotted, not realizing that their personal belief is part of the overall complexity and will of the system. Generally, Americans distrust of our government is natural. It's simply spilled over to other nations, and while some find it disturbing as I once did, I've come to realize that's because you blokes and crass asses have simply become more American.

Respect the law

[RiotingPacifist]

Shouldn't you respect a countries laws weather you agree with them or not, LOL yeah right when's the last time 23 Italian agents were convicted in the US and not handed over.

Re:Bubby? Is that you?

[John Hasler]

> Are we not allowed to state simple facts now?

Not in Germany, evidently. This is another area where Europe is way ahead of the USA, where we still harbor the quaint notion that the truth is an absolute defense. This deficiency is being adressed, though. See, for example, "hate crime" laws.

Re:Bubby? Is that you?

[mounthood]

You know who killed someone? Hitler. That's who.

Re:Bubby? Is that you?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently you don't have family who were in the military. And don't give me that crap about it being justifiable homicide just because Uncle Sam told you to kill them. There is no pacifist branch of the military, and you can't claim the moral high ground when you kill people for a living.

In America we tend to worship our troops, and have made a habit of holding our murderers in *higher* regard than the average person, unless they were free agents, in which case we put them in stinking holes in Texas and treat them like subhuman trash.

Germany is enlightened in this regard.

CAPTCHA for this post: "suspect"

Re:A fresh start

[Attila Dimedici]

Well, in Germany, you do not have that right. End of the story.

You clearly do not understand what a right is. Thomas Jefferson was under no illusion that the government was unable to interfere with "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", which he mentioned as inalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence. Just because German society wants the law written this way, does not mean that the law is not a violation of people's rights.

Re:Get your lawyers ready /.

[DarkOx]

The goal is wrong. As a general rule rehabilitation does not work; incapacitation does. Here in the states the crime rate really started to rise quickly in the sixties and seventies, when we started reducing sentences and emphasizing rehabilitation over the incapacitation model we had in the fifties and prior.

I don't know about Germany but here in the states if you want to reduce violent crime and serious property crime there are three things that need to happen. We need to decriminalize very minor crimes like drug possession and distribution, to free space in our prisons. We need to criminalize drug use destroying the demand side of the market. We need to make sentencing for all types of crime far more severe; lock up the dangerous folks especially and lose the keys.

Re:Bubby? Is that you?

[Ironsides]

Would you include the police officers with those that "kill people for a living"? Because really, there is no difference between military and police.

Re:Bubby? Is that you?

[Ironsides]

Not everything out of academia. The engineering & sciences side is pretty realistic when it comes to the world. The liberal arts side, not so much.

the nation of G.

[jipn4]

Between 1939 and 1945, the nation of G. (*) was responsible for the systematic extermination of an estimated 11-17 million Jews and other minorities.

(*) Name withheld by request of G. to make re-integration of G. into the global community of nations easier.

But you do...

[tjstork]

When you let murderers go free, and you protect them, essentially, that is still state sponsored execution of the murder victim. There's no "I didn't kill anyone choice". If you let the murderer walk, and you protect that murderers life, you essentially legalize murder.