Slashdot Mirror
German Federal Court Rules That Internet Connection Is Crucial To Everyday Life
Qedward writes "Internet access is as crucial to everyday life as having a phone connection and the loss of connectivity is deserving of financial compensation, the German Federal Court of Justice has ruled. Because having an internet connection is so significant for a large part of the German population, a customer whose service provider failed to provide connectivity between December 2008 and February 2009 is entitled to compensation, the court ruled today. 'It is the first time the court ruled that an internet connection is as important a commodity as having a phone,' said court spokeswoman Dietlind Weinland. The court, however, denied the plaintiff's request of €50 a day for his fax machine not working."
If Internet is essential to everyday life, these so called "rehab clinics" where they "cure" people from the Internets are actually not "good for us" at all.
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
You don't get compensation if your phone is out of order, why should you for internet?
What if the internet is down because the phone is? It isn't the ISPs fault but the owner of the copper.
Access to information available on the public networks shall not be abridged.
My wife does not want to have sex because she says she eat too tired
FTFY
What if the internet is down because the phone is? It isn't the ISPs fault but the owner of the copper.
Then the owner of the copper owes a refund to the ISP with which it signed a service level agreement.
I certainly have had no major difficulties living without a phone my whole life but going without an internet connection for a week deserves some significant preparation and, for two months, would require a radical shift in my way of life.
I know my having an internet connection but no phone puts me in an extreme minority but I had no idea it was common opinion that a phone is as essential as an internet connection.
Please say yes.
I'm one of the many people who have a "high-speed" broadband account advertised as what to buy for streaming online media, but the ISP gives a 200gb cap and drops you as a client if you go over it for more than 2 months. Watching Netflix HD video only a few hours a day hits that cap in no time, making the account not actually usable for what its advertised. I hope the effects of this ruling eventually trickles down to my country and this type of dropping a user is made illegal. At the very least switching a user to a more throttled connection would be a good compromise. Oh the ISP that does this is ptd.net, but alot of ISPs have similar practices.
http://interserver.net/
"Internet access is as crucial to everyday life as having a phone connection [...]"
The telcos *WISH* that having a phone connection were as crucial to everyday life as Internet access...
I hope the effects of this ruling eventually trickles down to my country and this type of dropping a user is made illegal.
The telcos and cabelcos have divided the country up into effective monopoly regions without the oversight that public utlities normally have. They also spend more on lobbying than any other trade group. So it ain't going to happen until something extreme happens, like a pretty blonde child dies in a way that can be directly attributed to a data-cap.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Actually I thought about it straight away. It's hyperbole; just the sort of thing somebody on CNN might say to start a good debate.
After all, these places take away the Internet completely. If the Internet is essential, where does that lead?
Also, Re: Food and even Water, yes too much can kill you but when was the last time a geek electrocuted her/himself in the basement through too much Internet usage? Or got too fat solely because of the Internet (not lifestyle - i.e. we all know what couch potatoes look like.
So actually, it was a spark, to find out what other thoughts that would lead to, for others.
Posting without Karma bonus, I've earned it above, and this is merely an explanatory post - and therefore is neither off-topic, nor redundant!
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
I do not think the word means what they think it means.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Actually, it's the opposite: more internet is good for you. For example, The Wired turned Lain into a god. Personally, the internet has transformed me into a being of superhuman intelligence; induced by the heated intellectual arguments that only the internet can provide. Following health advice from wise sages on blogspot has brought me to the pinnacle of human fitness as well. Exposure to great amounts of East-Asian media has left me a cultured man of refined tastes and deeply philosophical places such as Tumblr have opened my eyes to the discrimination that fat people face and the hetero-normative agenda to keep the genderqueer down. My productivity at work is much higher than my peers, as I may freely sip from the great fountains of knowledge that are the various SEO'd sites that I may copy things from. I have entered over thirty thousand entries into my HOSTS file and my computer blazes past the tired machinery the commoners use. Before finding the Internet, I was barely a man, but a long abandoned 28.8 kpbs US Robotics Softmodem changed my life.
That'd be priceless if you removed 'nym' from your nick.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
I agree, but ...
Just because it is an essential service does not mean you have the right to abuse it. It does not mean everyone else should cover the cost of your Netflix addiction. If you want more then you should pay for more. In my part of the world the (monopoly) ISP is happy to provide more bandwidth, at a higher price.
This (hopefully) could turn into a guaranteed right, much like, and perhaps conjoined with, freedom of speech.
and why should they... Scanners+email+internet have replaced that function, but are also what many teenagers don't know how to use.
Todays' kids take a photo with their smartphone and mms it. That's mobile phone systems, not the good old and tried internet with cables and dirt.
1. Download free stuff
2. Three times
3. Profit
I hope the effects of this ruling eventually trickles down to my country and this type of dropping a user is made illegal.
AAAHAAAHHHAAAAAaaaaaaah. Good one! No, the court ruled this was basically a breach of contract because any reasonable person would expect their service provider to have repaired the outage in less than, uhh, two months. The contract you signed says "200GB cap, lulz" so no, the courts won't do anything about that. They're saying internet is a vital resource, not that you get an unlimited amount of it. It's like the roads (tada! I never disappoint slashdot! Car analogy time) -- you can drive your car on them and the government has to be reasonable about restrictions on you and your vehicle. It does not mean it has to build a road across the Atlantic for you.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
So does this mean that Germany will get rid of their crazy new TV licensing scheme? I live in Germany, so not have a TV and see no reason why I should give these NAZI criminals money thet didn't earn and don't deserve.
Personally, the internet has transformed me into a being of superhuman intelligence;
Yes, being able to google the answer is an ego-booster, but I wouldn't call it "superhuman".
induced by the heated intellectual arguments that only the internet can provide.
I'll give you the heated, but I think you've been off the internet since, uhh, 1998. That fall was pretty much the last time there was an intellectual argument to be had.
Following health advice from wise sages on blogspot has brought me to the pinnacle of human fitness as wellt
You've got less than two years to live before drinking unpasterized milk, raw eggs, and eating undercooked meat kills you. Also, you're single now, since your girlfriend left you for trying to milk her at night, saying you needed at least a liter to make this new souflet recipe...
Exposure to great amounts of East-Asian media has left me a cultured man of refined tastes
Perv.
deeply philosophical places such as Tumblr have opened my eyes to the discrimination that fat people face and the hetero-normative agenda to keep the genderqueer down.,/quote>
Tumblr only shows you how to wear flannel and skinny jeans ironically while riding your vintage bike. And the fat people and genderqueer would like a word with you when you're done back behind that dumpster in the unlit alley.
My productivity at work is much higher than my peers, as I may freely sip from the great fountains of knowledge that are the various SEO'd sites that I may copy things from.
Sooo, your boss doesn't know yet you waste hours on Slashdot late on thursday nights. Well, he doesn't know I do either, so I'll let you keep that one. But SEO'd sites will rot your brain dude, just sayin'.
I have entered over thirty thousand entries into my HOSTS file and my computer blazes past the tired machinery the commoners use.
So you clicked 'immunize' in Spybot. Got it.
Before finding the Internet, I was barely a man, but a long abandoned 28.8 kpbs US Robotics Softmodem changed my life.
+++ATH0
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I'm one of the many people who have a "high-speed" broadband account advertised as what to buy for streaming online media, but the ISP gives a 200gb cap and drops you as a client if you go over it for more than 2 months. Watching Netflix HD video only a few hours a day hits that cap in no time, making the account not actually usable for what its advertised. I hope the effects of this ruling eventually trickles down to my country and this type of dropping a user is made illegal. At the very least switching a user to a more throttled connection would be a good compromise. Oh the ISP that does this is ptd.net, but alot of ISPs have similar practices.
In most countries, advertising that leaves out critical information (not noting a crucial and unusual limit), or misrepresents information (such as advertising a broadband internet connection as 'unlimited') is illegal. Unfortunately I don't think the US falls under this set of countries, but I'd say it is worth a shot. Write the relevant agency that is in charge of advertising. If that doesn't help, seek legal council and find out if that helps.
I'll give you the heated, but I think you've been off the internet since, uhh, 1998. That fall was pretty much the last time there was an intellectual argument to be had.
I thought it was September 1993. I was around for that one.
Learn to love Alaska
Ah... there's the catch. You see, in the gool 'ol US of A, this amounts to regulation. And everyone in the good 'ol US of A knows that regulation = bad. /sarcasm off
As an American who emigrated to another country, this difference is really visible after you have been out of the USA for some time. I live in the EU, and the consumer protections are so much stronger. Much of what goes on as "normal business" in the USA is illegal here, with regard to consumer protection. Apple learned this the hard way, when they got slapped hard in several EU countries for attempting to induce customers to buy AppleCare protection when under EU law, consumers are entitled to 2 years of warranty protection, not just a single year as in the USA. Yes, I know AppleCare is more than just normal warranty coverage, but they tried to imply that without it you get only 1 year warranty which is absolutely not according to EU law and misleading to the consumer.
As another example from the mobile phone industry, it is illegal here to tie the device to the service. You are free to buy your phone from anyone, and select the operator you want. You can change operators at any time, to any other operator. Your number is portable. All it takes is a new SIM card. Of course, this is only for un-subsidized phones, but subsidized phones are quite rare here. They certainly exist and major operators offer them, but the vast majority own un-subsidized since you are crazy to buy a subsidized phone (do the math, in every case, you are paying MUCH more to the operator over the life of the phone). Thanks to this freedom of unlocked phones and the ease of switching operators, there are literally dozens of operators to choose from, in this small country with only 5.2 million people. Compare that to the US where you have at most a handful of operators to select from and all of them are universally bad compared to the operators here. I would add that the prices for service here are much lower than in the US. It's quite easy to get a basic mobile service from about $10/month, and even service with data for not much more. Oh, and what are these things called data caps again?`We don't have those. Same for our internet service.
Now, someone will chime in about educating yourself as a consumer, but we all know that most companies do not want an educated consumer, because educated consumers won't fall for their marketing tricks. Companies have proven time and again that without some amount of regulation they will act only in their best interests, which is to make as much money for their stakeholders as possible. The absence of regulation, as in the USA, lets companies get away with a lot more at the expense and detriment of the consumer.
I'm also happy to live in a country (Finland) that has granted its citizens internet access as a right. Practically everything is done electronically here, from general banking to paying bills to shopping. Nearly all government services are handled electronically as well, so not having an internet connection severely limits you.
Watching Netflix for a few hours a day is now considered abuse? Some of my family members watch more tv than that.
How could using a service advertised for media streaming in this way ever be considered abuse? If they really feel that way they should either advertise it differently (less misleading) or clearly show their limits in the advertisement.
There is the question of 'reasonable' though. In the car analogy, a 'road' that has a 10Kg axle weight restriction isn't a 'reasonable' road.
This is the pretext for socialist governments to force taxpayers to pay for everyone's Internet connection — broadband, of course. They will need computers, of course, so taxpayers will pay for those. Etc., etc.
Good point.
Good point.
I'll give you the heated, but I think you've been off the internet since, uhh, 1998. That fall was pretty much the last time there was an intellectual argument to be had.
I thought it was September 1993. I was around for that one.
whoosh....
Serial Experiments Lain (which the GP references with the subtlety of a sledgehammer) ran in 1998.
It's good when businesses are held responsible for failing to provide the service their customers are paying for.
However, it sucks that the court thinks you only deserve compensation when it is for something "essential" and if you were dumb enough not to get an alternative yourself ahead of time.
I don't think you can tag all of us in Europe the same way.
Subsidised phones are very common for the over twenties in the UK (~70 million people). But we get the same sort of deals as you in Finland.
I swapped provides not so long back. My number was transfered over in just under four hours.
Pay-as-you-go phones can be unlocked after six months, or after a minimal amount of credit has been added.
It's all very, very easy. Just as it should be.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
then they will just slow you down and say for X per MB / GB / ECT we will restore your speed to full.
I wonder, then, if it will no longer take a month between the time that you order your connection and the time that they come to hook it up. I moved to Germany two years ago, and I was lucky, it only took 3 weeks before Deutch Telekom turned on my DSL. Some of my colleagues have had to wait for 7-8 weeks!
I don't know exactly what the laws are about this in my own country and certainly not in Germany but... doesn't it just make sense that if someone is paying for a service and they don't get the servcie they deserve a refund? That just seems like common sense! I don't see how that services necessity to daily life even comes in to play.
Now, someone will chime in about educating yourself as a consumer, but we all know that most companies do not want an educated consumer, because educated consumers won't fall for their marketing tricks. Companies have proven time and again that without some amount of regulation they will act only in their best interests, which is to make as much money for their stakeholders as possible. The absence of regulation, as in the USA, lets companies get away with a lot more at the expense and detriment of the consumer.
The answer is simple. Educate yourself. Don't let the company with a vested interested do that job instead.
I'm also happy to live in a country (Finland) that has granted its citizens internet access as a right.
I imagine that they don't actually legally treat it as a "right". It's just some word that you like to use in place of "entitlement". But then again, all sorts of crap is considered "rights" by some governments and who knows? Those governments might last.
Glancing at Wikipedia, I see that the current Finnish constitution has been kicking around for quite some time - since 2000, almost 13 years ago (with some parts coming from even earlier, in 1995)! So of course, you'd expect people with that kind of long, storied constitutional history to have a deep grasp of what should be or shouldn't be a "right".
My beef here, is that the problem with making entitlements a "right" is who is responsible for insuring that you have this "right"? Who pays? It's just a poorly thought out idea that in practice generates a legal requirement that gets violated to some degree in order to address the "tragedy of the commons" problem.
Let's see if all this lasts a few decades first, before we start crowing about how advanced and special the EU experiment and many of its governments are. Last I heard, the weaker governments in the system were already failing.
Posting without Karma bonus
The "no karma" and "no subscriber" boxes don't seem to work, at least on my machine. Then again, I can't change my password on it, either (FireFox on W7).
mcgrew here, posting anonymously so my offtopic comment will remain hidden to most
TINSTAAFL.
You know, Europeans CONSTANTLY complain about how much more expensive something is in the EU. Like how a MacBook Pro is US$2200, and EUR2200 over there as well. Given the exchange rate, that's over 40% more expensive in the EU than in the US. Granted, some of it is because of sales tax being inclusive instead of exclusive (and much higher sales taxes - 20%) and import duties, but a lot of it is also because you're buying "extended warranties" all the time.
AppleCare does include more than an extended warranty (it adds phone support beyond 90 days, and gives you access to a bunch of free diagnostic tools), but in essence in the EU, it's bundled in (minus phone support and stuff, but that doesn't make it worth it, IMHO).
Or how in the US, whenever a store (b&m or internet) asks "do you want to buy an extended warranty?" you say no, but in the EU, the law effectively says yes for you (and the price is built in).
And I believe the laws don't apply if you import - many EU folks have taken to buying stuff from the US because it's much cheaper - but again, they don't get the protections for that, even on things like Apple products. Apple was fined because they confused people who bought stuff in the EU, but they can legitimately turn down service for computers bought in the US after the US warranty period is expired but before the mandated EU one. After all, they can make you return it to the store... in the US...).
True, However, one has to consider a difference in cultures, as well. Americans tend to favor choice over being forced into things - which is why stuff often have shorter warranties for lower prices - Americans generally base decisions on price moreso than other value-adds like longer warranties and other things - they prefer to have the option than be forced by law into accepting it.
Though, things like 90 day warranties are a joke (especially since there are manufacturers that offer warranties as-new, like Apple, if you buy a refurb from them).
End result - yes the consumer protection laws are much stronger and often the envy of the world. But you're also paying for them in the form of increased prices. In the EU, that's less of an issue since the culture there generally considers value over price. In North America, it's much harder as price is often taken as a higher priority than value.
Does this mean that, if I am hypothetically German, and my hypothetical German ISP decides to put me behind carrier grade NAT, I can hypothetically claim compensation for not being provided with an Internet connection (in full)?
Just because it is an essential service does not mean you have the right to abuse it. It does not mean everyone else should cover the cost of your Netflix addiction. If you want more then you should pay for more. In my part of the world the (monopoly) ISP is happy to provide more bandwidth, at a higher price.
The typical ISP has a 95% gross margin on bandwidth.
The only abuse here is by the ISPs.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
:|
Now, someone will chime in about educating yourself as a consumer, but we all know that most companies do not want an educated consumer, because educated consumers won't fall for their marketing tricks. Companies have proven time and again that without some amount of regulation they will act only in their best interests, which is to make as much money for their stakeholders as possible. The absence of regulation, as in the USA, lets companies get away with a lot more at the expense and detriment of the consumer.
The answer is simple. Educate yourself. Don't let the company with a vested interested do that job instead.
Yes, that is very important and I totally agree.
Also, ban business ass-rape-fest on consumers - there's no reason to trash strong consumer protection, nor trade in for US corporation protection system.
I'm also happy to live in a country (Finland) that has granted its citizens internet access as a right.
I imagine that they don't actually legally treat it as a "right". It's just some word that you like to use in place of "entitlement". But then again, all sorts of crap is considered "rights" by some governments and who knows? Those governments might last.
Yes, they might. Also, finnish strong consumer protection laws are way older than EU.
Glancing at Wikipedia, I see that the current Finnish constitution has been kicking around for quite some time - since 2000, almost 13 years ago (with some parts coming from even earlier, in 1995)! So of course, you'd expect people with that kind of long, storied constitutional history to have a deep grasp of what should be or shouldn't be a "right".
Yeah, we probably think way differently about constitution than yanks, and it's kinda weird thing to me too, but in the end has nothing to do with out strong grasp on what is/isn't "right".
In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
Also, ban business ass-rape-fest on consumers - there's no reason to trash strong consumer protection, nor trade in for US corporation protection system.
Well, there's no demonstrated need for strong consumer protection. That's a reason right there. My view is that getting screwed a few times is a necessary step in becoming a smart consumer. And I'd rather have smart consumers than a herd of "protected" dumb consumers.
I know it's just not popular to defend businesses, but their interests are as relevant as the interests of their customers. Compliance with "strong consumer protection" costs money and jobs. And what's the benefit? So the consumer doesn't have to work or think so hard about what they do. I see that as counterproductive for everyone involved.
Also, ban business ass-rape-fest on consumers - there's no reason to trash strong consumer protection, nor trade in for US corporation protection system.
Well, there's no demonstrated need for strong consumer protection. That's a reason right there. My view is that getting screwed a few times is a necessary step in becoming a smart consumer. And I'd rather have smart consumers than a herd of "protected" dumb consumers.
There's no perfect system and you're guaranteed to get screwed a few times no matter what the consumer protection laws are. I don't see our strong consumer protection as something slowing down becoming a smart consumer but rather smart consumers with strong views as the reason we have ended up with these consumer protection laws. From my point of view what US has, for example, is strong corporation protection laws - and actual support for them by consumers - enabling corporations to more easily get away with screwing consumers.
What cbope wrote had some actual results of how things differ here and there, and I really don't envy this at all: "The absence of regulation, as in the USA, lets companies get away with a lot more at the expense and detriment of the consumer".
I'm constantly amazed on how some things work out there and how there is no stronger demands to change things (and actual support from consumers) - with everything that companies do get away with over there it really don't seem like "educate the consumers but don't regulate business (except the way business lobbies for)" is working - at all.
I know it's just not popular to defend businesses, but their interests are as relevant as the interests of their customers. Compliance with "strong consumer protection" costs money and jobs. And what's the benefit? So the consumer doesn't have to work or think so hard about what they do. I see that as counterproductive for everyone involved.
The benefit? The consumer, especially educated one, gets to consider more relevant things about their consumer choices than "am I going to be screwed over worse by this or that company", shifting some of the burden on corporations to actually put some effort to not actively try and screw consumers over in just any way they can come up with.
You said it yourself: the customers interests are just as relevant as the interests of businesses.
In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
From my point of view what US has, for example, is strong corporation protection laws - and actual support for them by consumers - enabling corporations to more easily get away with screwing consumers.
Such relatively universal support to me indicates something that works.
The benefit? The consumer, especially educated one, gets to consider more relevant things about their consumer choices than "am I going to be screwed over worse by this or that company", shifting some of the burden on corporations to actually put some effort to not actively try and screw consumers over in just any way they can come up with. You said it yourself: the customers interests are just as relevant as the interests of businesses.
I don't see that connection. Strong consumer protection doesn't mean that at all. It just means that the consumer has something more of an advantage, and in my view, an undeserved one, when dealing with businesses.