Munich Court To Try Facebook's Zuckerberg For Inciting Hatred (dw.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Deutsche Welle: A Munich court has opened a lawsuit against Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, German media reported on Friday. News outlet "der Spiegel" wrote on its website, before the main weekly magazine's Saturday release, that it had obtained court documents charging the social media mogul with incitement to hatred. Zuckerberg is reportedly being charged alongside Facebook CEO Sheryl Sandberg, chief Europe lobbyist Richard Allan, and his Berlin counterpart Eva-Maria Kirschsieper. According to Spiegel, the complaint comes from the Wurzburg-based attorney Chan-jo Jun. In the suit, he accuses Facebook of tolerating appeals for murder, threats of violence, and Holocaust denial, among other things. Laws regulating hate speech in Germany are extremely tight, with most Nazi symbolism and racist propaganda strictly forbidden, a legacy of Germany's role in World War II. Although Facebook is obliged to remove illegal content from its site, it has repeatedly garnered hefty criticism for the time it takes to do so.

Comments

schadenfreude is German too

[avandesande]

Fun watching the SJWs eating their own.....

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

How are they eating their own? I thought SJWs hated free speech? This seems like something they would support.

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the really sad thing os the right-wankers who will try to make something of this, but fall short of success.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess it's 'fun' watching pseudo-libertarian idiots conflate German hate speech laws (which are there for a reason) with social justice warriors being upset about something. But it's also kinda sad.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Have fun learning why this is important.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

They LOVE hate speech, but only when it's targeted at cis-gendered heterosexual white men.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Have fun learning why this is important.

Whenever a government comes down on someone without ever having to show that they actually did any material, measurable, verifiable harm of any sort, yes that's important. It's an important warning to freedom-loving people everywhere.

Hint: a *crime* is an event which has a victim.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Facebook should not enforce laws. The government should.

The burden of policing all those public-facing communications for illegal content is huge, expensive, and completely within the purview of a police department (not a private business).

Free communication is important. In order for it to exist, the burden for policing it (inasmuch as at actually makes any sense to do so) must not be put on the private businesses that simply provide the forum.

If this is not what the law says, then the law should be changed, because the law is wrong.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

What does that even mean?

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

They LOVE hate speech, but only when it's targeted at cis-gendered heterosexual white men.

Or people who disagree with their politics. Especailly if the objection is that you like their intentions, but implementing their idea would require a police state complete with thought-crimes*, orthodoxy and heresy and the federal government already has a frightening amount of power.

It's the one argument they never seem to address, ever. They won't tell you, "this is the level of power I find acceptable, and here's why I think it's worth the slippery-slope risk, see here and here are the checks and balances against it that will provide oversight and transparency". For Triple Bonus Points, they could say "here is where this idea has been tried and failed throughout history, here are concrete steps to avoid repeating that history". But they won't do that. What they will do is get more shrill and call you names, etc. So you see their power to persuade is low, to put it kindly.

The bulk of the problem is that most people just don't really know what they're talking about. They didn't arrive at their position through any sort of analysis and reasonable conclusion. They got there because their favorite opinion leader made it sound good.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

German hate speech laws (which are there for a reason)

Auschwitz was also there for a reason.

The cure for repression is not more repression.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh last I checked skeletons don't have stomachs. Or an esophagus. Or an ass.

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the one argument they never seem to address, ever.

Might be because any time this discussion comes up, it is met with the "OMG OMG BIGBROTHER" hysteria reaction. Of course, the same applies to discussion of gun control, health insurance, refugees, climate change, banking reform, and whatever the latest thing the right-wing is having vapors over.

It's really hard to hear the other side when you start screaming that the end is nigh.

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[hackwrench]

Not the "OMG OMG BIGBROTHER" hysteria reaction. https://www.youtube.com/result...

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Bc Zuckerberg is inciting hatred for facebook?

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[SvnLyrBrto]

You could just try ignoring them. Seriously, don't bother engaging them and go about living your life. You'll save yourself some stress, and you'll avoid validating them.

It's funny how trends come in waves. This has all happened before, and no doubt it'll happen again. Now, the detractors call it "SJW". I don't know what they call themselves. But in the 1990s, it was the exact thing, only we all called it "political correctness". And you know what? The 1990s college kids eventually graduated, found out that the BS doesn't fly in the real-world workplace, and grew the fuck up. The "SJW" people will eventually do the same thing, everyone will forget about it the same way we've already forgotten about emo (Ha! Made you remember. I bet it's been years.), and in another two decades it'll be back with another new name. And boy, are the 1990s back in force. JNCOs are back. Kikwear is in business again. Raves are happening again. Nine Inch Nails played in San Francisco recently. And I swear to the gods... I saw a group of kids in the mall today who looked exact-fracking-ly like a garage ska band from when I was in high school.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Nazis get repressed because they're violent antisocial cunts. Deal with it.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[ArmoredDragon]

Nazis get repressed because they're violent antisocial cunts. Deal with it.

So just to be safe, we have to censor all speech that can in any way be interpreted as nazism, instead of just letting the person ruin their own credibility. Fine people these Germans are.

It's no wonder the US issued a stark warning about Germany:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

So I guess drunk driving is all fine and dandy as long as no one gets hit?

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[serviscope_minor]

But in the 1990s, it was the exact thing, only we all called it "political correctness". And you know what? The 1990s college kids eventually graduated, found out that the BS doesn't fly in the real-world workplace, and grew the fuck up.

Except it didn't happen how you think it happened. An awful lot of stuff that people dismissed as "PC rubbish" has become part of the culture. For example homophobic slurs were common in the 90s, and pretty socially acceptable and the people speaking out against were dismissed as PC. What happened is they graduated, went to work and changed the culture making the old bigots get a clue.

It's not just homophobia either. I've not personally heard "paki" being used in the wild for well over a decade now. Etc etc etc.

So if "SJW" follows the same course as PC, some of it will disappear but the rest will stick and no one will think it's bad except a few raging bigots.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[MoarSauce123]

OK, then give the police department unrestricted access to the Facebook servers so that they can effectively enforce the law. Still think that is the way to go?

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[MoarSauce123]

Schadenfreude means to draw satisfaction from others misery.

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[Ol Olsoc]

Not the "OMG OMG BIGBROTHER" hysteria reaction.

Imagine though, if Facebook or any other social media were forced to remove or not allow posting of anything anyone found objectionable.

By the time you added up the concerns of individual countries like Germany, France, Turkey, China, North Korea, and take individual groups concerns, PETA, the Tumbler crowd, Religion pro or con, or any other group that is offended at something, you come up with nothing allowable.

Because for whatever is out there, someone hates it.

I would suggest that if Germany finds it necessary to determine what the rest of the world can see on Facebook, it will be pretty difficult to make that happen. They might be more successful to make viewing of Facebook a crime in Germany, and work on methods of blocking them. Perhaps a Volkscomputer is in order.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[yuriklastalov]

First they came for our racial slurs, but I said nothing because I wasn't a racist.

Then they came for our anti-women slurs, but I said nothing because I wasn't a misogynist.

Then they came for our sexual orientation slurs, but I said nothing because I wasn't a homophobe.

Then they came for me, and I called them a my friends because there weren't any other words left.

Re:schadenfreude is German too

[yuriklastalov]

Yes, whatever it takes! Won't somebody save us from this terrible free speech? These... people on the internet have ugly opinions, it's a travesty! They must be stopped!

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[Anonymous Coward]

Brave US men and women in uniform still occupy that hostile foreign land. May that nest of vipers never again be allowed to corrupt the civilized world.

Re: schadenfreude is German too

[KingBenny]

thats right mah man, whatever you say there's always someone who will take offense, too many puppies, not enough mics
its pure neo-censorship in the name of terrerizms and nothing less (but its also a nice way to get billions for raison d'état ... maybe i should be careful what im saying here .ulz)

Unacceptable behaviour

[Anonymous Coward]

I expected such behavior from Islamic barbarians, not from fellow civilized Western men. Shameful.

Oh Germany...

[TiggertheMad]

The fact that that Zuckerberg is Jewish makes the fact that he is being named in a German lawsuit about hate speech an holocaust denial particularly deliciously ironic.

Re:Oh Germany...

[rmdingler]

The fact that that Zuckerberg is Jewish makes the fact that he is being named in a German lawsuit about hate speech an holocaust denial particularly deliciously ironic.

Yes. Likewise, it is rather devilishly clever how fast freedom of speech can be called into question when it is renamed Hate. After all, hate is in the eye of the beholder, and everyone has the right to be offended. Too.

Christ, we are a mess.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Jzanu Syr]

His personal ancestry doesn't absolve him of fault for company operations contrary to German law. Facebook must comply in a timely manner not shift responsibility.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that that Zuckerberg is Jewish makes the fact that he is being named in a German lawsuit about hate speech an holocaust denial particularly deliciously ironic.

Yes. Likewise, it is rather devilishly clever how fast freedom of speech can be called into question when it is renamed Hate. After all, hate is in the eye of the beholder, and everyone has the right to be offended. Too.

Christ, we are a mess.

The correct response in most cases is to tell the offended person to grow up and get the fuck over it. Words don't really hurt you, only your own overreaction to them gives such power to whoever says them.

I personally accepted long ago that with several billion people in the world, I'm not going to like the opinions and beliefs of all of them. Also, plenty of them won't like my own thoughts. None of this gives me the right to censor anyone. Understanding that is part of growing up - so is understanding that any excuse for restricting freedom is very dangerous.

If you're going to have a criminal code, the punishment needs to be in proportion to the crime. If I say something that offends you, how long does it take for you to get over that (assuming you're immature and weak-willed enough that you got offended in the first place, instead of deciding to no longer listen to me)? A few minutes? A few hours maybe? In what way would this materially, measurably, objectively harm you? It wouldn't. Throwing someone in jail and placing large fines against them, just for this, is complete overkill. That's not remotely proportional.

Obviously I'm not talking about things like death threats, but in that case it's the threat of violence -- not the communication of unpopular/"offensive" ideas -- that causes it to be a crime. When it comes to Holocaust deniers, bigots, etc., I actually want them to speak up without fear of legal reprisal. I want them to openly identify themselves. That makes it much easier for me to choose never to associate with them. If I don't know who they are, this process takes more time and effort.

Free speech is for mature adult people who can deal with life. Censorship is for two types of people: 1. Overgrown children (often in adult bodies) who value fleeting emotional states more than their own precious freedoms, and, 2. Control freaks who love an excuse, any excuse, that "justifies" their desire to control what other people say and do. It really is that simple.

Re:Oh Germany...

[ogdenk]

If it were me, I'd just shut down local operations in Germany, block '.de' and let the Nazis that believe in thought crime and want to suppress free speech stay in their safe space.

Re:Oh Germany...

[ShanghaiBill]

If it were me, I'd just shut down local operations in Germany, block '.de'

It is not just Germany. Most European countries have laws against hate speech, and many specifically outlaw Holocaust denial.

Americans often assume that the free speech guarantees in our Constitution are the default, at least in Western countries. That is not true.

Re:Oh Germany...

[ogdenk]

They aren't the default, and that's a problem. I'm not willing to have my rights online crippled to make overzealous douchebags across the sea feel better. Fuck'em.

Re: Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

Words don't really hurt you, only your own overreaction to them gives such power to whoever says them.

If you limit yourself to the emotional impact of words, you're still off base, but that isn't even true in this case, since it isn't limited to matters of real feeling.

Understanding that is part of growing up - so is understanding that any excuse for restricting freedom is very dangerous.

That there are people who will do things that go beyond merely disliking is also part of growing up. It helps with understanding that dangerous tools can still be appropriate to use.

If you're going to have a criminal code, the punishment needs to be in proportion to the crime. If I say something that offends you, how long does it take for you to get over that (assuming you're immature and weak-willed enough that you got offended in the first place, instead of deciding to no longer listen to me)? A few minutes? A few hours maybe? In what way would this materially, measurably, objectively harm you? It wouldn't. Throwing someone in jail and placing large fines against them, just for this, is complete overkill. That's not remotely proportional.

What if it does harm them for a long time, even for life? Ah wait, you're already at the point of deciding that they are the ones at fault anyway. Too bad for you, people don't work that way.

Words can hurt. If you can't learn that, maybe you are the dangerous one here.

Obviously I'm not talking about things like death threats, but in that case it's the threat of violence -- not the communication of unpopular/"offensive" ideas -- that causes it to be a crime.

Well, this complaint covers that issue, so...

When it comes to Holocaust deniers, bigots, etc., I actually want them to speak up without fear of legal reprisal. I want them to openly identify themselves. That makes it much easier for me to choose never to associate with them. If I don't know who they are, this process takes more time and effort.

If only it were limited to that. But it's not. The denial, the bigotry, leads to realization, to action, to results. Bullies don't bully just because it gives them an emotional thrill, though that is part of it. They do it because of the results it gets.

Free speech is for mature adult people who can deal with life.

Good point, let's not let the immature jejune people who can't deal with it abuse it.

Censorship is for two types of people: 1. Overgrown children (often in adult bodies) who value fleeting emotional states more than their own precious freedoms, and, 2. Control freaks who love an excuse, any excuse, that "justifies" their desire to control what other people say and do. It really is that simple.

But thinking it is that simple is censorship in itself. At best, maybe you will grudgingly tolerate those with another opinion or perspective, but ultimately, you are refusing to recognize them which means if nothing else thay you must be censoring them in your own mind.

However, you think about that though, the real story is that if the people who would abuse truth and freedom are given free reign, they risk harming us all. At some point, there has to be a line.

Look, just try a bit more appreciation of what people have to say, rather than resorting to a oversimplification of the situation.
 

Re:Oh Germany...

[execthis]

Excellent response. Your points are not just rhetorically good ones, they are philosophically as well.

I'm still watching the video of the Hillary supporters who harassed, mocked, and abused the homeless woman in Hollywood who had been sitting there with a sign supporting Trump. Its so sickening that liberalism has been hijacked by the most disgusting sociopaths who represent that antithesis to actual liberal ideals.

Re: Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm still watching the video of the Hillary supporters who harassed, mocked, and abused the homeless woman in Hollywood who had been sitting there with a sign supporting Trump. Its so sickening that liberalism has been hijacked by the most disgusting sociopaths who represent that antithesis to actual liberal ideals.

Maybe you should stop doing that, and take a look at other actions by other liberals? It could be you are distorting your own perceptions by overexposure to unrepresentative incidents.

As Larry Niven said, there is no cause so pure it does not attract fuggheads.

Re: Oh Germany...

[WaffleMonster]

If only it were limited to that. But it's not. The denial, the bigotry, leads to realization, to action, to results. Bullies don't bully just because it gives them an emotional thrill, though that is part of it. They do it because of the results it gets.

But thinking it is that simple is censorship in itself. At best, maybe you will grudgingly tolerate those with another opinion or perspective, but ultimately, you are refusing to recognize them which means if nothing else thay you must be censoring them in your own mind.

However, you think about that though, the real story is that if the people who would abuse truth and freedom are given free reign, they risk harming us all. At some point, there has to be a line.

I couldn't have summed it up any better myself. Exactly this kind of fear drives many feckless idiots such as yourself to believe censorship is cool.

They think if they don't "shut up" their opponents by means of leveraging their states monopoly on violence they will be doomed, Hitler will rise from his grave or consensus for a certain ideology you are diametrically opposed to will be forever lost to evil.

Freedom isn't free, you have a voice just like everyone else. If you give a shit you can work to bolster consensus for a different position than those you "hate" (e.g. think should to be silenced by means of violence).

People like you just want to be lazy and suck off the teet of your countries legitimacy rather than put up and fight for the ideas you believe in. Your pathetic.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Mashiki]

Better watch out, there's plenty of screwballs here on /. that believe that your rights should be restricted or suspended because it hurts their feelings. Maybe you can join myself and others in the "defense of speech equals Fascism camp."

Re:Oh Germany...

[mvdwege]

Words don't really hurt you, only your own overreaction to them gives such power to whoever says them.

That's exactly what the German-Jewish middle class thought in the Weimar Republic. How many of them survived?

When you grow up and move out of your parents' basement, you may find out that life is a tad more complex than you think.

Re: Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

And how does your genius plan offset lost revenue and costs of shutting down operations in every country that you think has wrong laws? You know, the board and shareholders will want to know.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

Shockingly, I don't seem to find it very difficult to hate Nazis.

On the other hand Nazism is a curable disease, or so my father showed me.

Re:Oh Germany...

[CanEHdian]

Christ, we are a mess.

If only people could be convinced to leave religion completely out of this. The world is either supported on the backs of four elephants, themselves resting on the back of a turtle, OR it is being held up for eternity by the deity Atlas. So the Elephantians, asking the Atlassians what happens when Atlas needs to pee or gets itchy on his back, are subject to "hate speech" charges? I don't know about you, but for me it's impossible to take either Atlassians or Elephantians seriously, and the harder they try to convince, the louder the laughing gets. Because you don't have to go to LEO (though it helps) to know the Earth can be approximated to be an oblate spheroid, which you can circumvent. No Atlas, No Turtles. So what will people say in the year 2250? Laugh at us like we laugh at the Atlassians?

It takes Great Men^H^H^H Persons of Science to know the Earth moves in a straight line, with the curvature of space-time causing it to orbit the Sun. This insight takes time to develop and Eureka moments. But yes, Earth orbits the Sun, not the other way around. Another example of a Ridiculous Article Of Faith, Perfectly Fine To Make Fun Of. But if you were in front of the Spanish Inquisition at the time, you'd think twice about saying it.

Come to think of it, the similarities between the PC/SJW crowd/by extension the Munich Court and the Spanish Inquisition are striking!

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hurt my feelings? Boo hoo. I has a sad now.

Attack my rights? Oopsie. I has a reason to terminate your life processes now.

Re:Oh Germany...

[rmdingler]

If we take care that the spread of scientific progress continues in this incredible age of free information, the dilution of religious influence will continue.

If we revert suddenly to dark times and dictatorships, whether due to technology's backfiring, natural disaster, or a geopolitical shift, we will once again embrace the narcotic of superstition.

*Swearing in religious terms or foreign languages is not intended to be considered an endorsement of either. Christ!

Re:Oh Germany...

[drsquare]

Fine, just don't ever do business outside of the US, which is the only country in the world with an innate right to free speech.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhm, it's the nazis that are being "suppressed".

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, unless you want to disclose anything the US government's covert criminal activities, or if you want to say anything that could be perceived as critical of the police state whenan officer of any of their anit-freedom agencies is near. Or anywhere near a border. Oh, and if you do say something that you are allowed to say by US constitition, make sure everyone agrees with you that this is allowed, because the legal system is completely broken, so the odds are you will end up in jail anyway and even if you don't you may end up bankrupt.

In fact, I would recommend to stay as far away from that shithole as reasonable possible.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not just Germany. Most European countries have laws against hate speech, and many specifically outlaw Holocaust denial.

That's because the European Union is just the 4th Reich in disguise.

Re:Oh Germany...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you had the same restrictions it might have helped a lot preventing the whole Trump debacle....

Re:Oh Germany...

[ogdenk]

If Trump wins it's because he has broad support and people agree with him. That just means there's a lot of assholes here but it's the right of the people to be assholes. I'm not voting for someone like that but I wouldn't try to stop anyone else from doing so. I'm more of a Gary Johnson fan.

You're either free or you aren't. If you prefer to be non-free in order to drive such views underground where assholes just develop a persecution complex you aren't doing yourself any favors.

No one will EVER get to tell me what views I can or can not express.

Re:Oh Germany...

[ogdenk]

I can't help it if most subjects in other countries enjoy tyranny in order to never have their feelings hurt or core ideals and/or religion challenged. I certainly wouldn't waste money on developing tech to stop people from voicing their opinions, no matter how insane they are. Even if they're Nazis or terrorists. I prefer bigots be loud and proud, that way I know who they are and they can't claim they're being victimized or oppressed.

Suppression of free speech and freedom of the press is straight up tyranny and should have no place in modern society no matter how noble the intentions are or how objectionable the speech. The only exceptions being direct threats of violence not related to civil revolt.

I will not tolerate the US becoming a copy of the whiny sniveling EU.

Sorry NO

[rtb61]

Germany can not sue because the German government itself is criminally negligent because they can block it if they want to. Hence for Germany to sue Facebook, Germany must also sue itself. The German government chose not to block Facebook and hence the German government itself is liable. Facebook for all of it's many, many faults is quite simply an open broadcaster of the content created by others and it is the Germans along with the German government who choose to import that content as well as creating it's own internally. Every government faces the exact same issue. They can force it to be blocked by local service providers and until they do, they are more liable than the open broadcasters. The German government allows Facebook in, their choice, they are just as liable as Facebook. Technically first they have to strive to block Facebook and then they can try to sue Facebook for trying to get around those blocks.

Facebook should also declare on their homepage and as part of their sign up, that only 'Opinions' are allowed and Facebook is only an 'Opinion' social media site and in the most humorous fashion state categorically that no facts are allowed (technically already true for the majority of ads they show, they just lie about that). There is a real difference between, saying that I hate Germans (not true by the way) or saying that Germans should be hated ( again not true by the way, don't want the Germans to sue me or 'hmm' Slashdot ;D).

Re:Sorry NO

[duke_cheetah2003]

Germany can not sue because the German government itself is criminally negligent because they can block it if they want to. Hence for Germany to sue Facebook, Germany must also sue itself.

You must be one those people who thinks gun manufacturers are liable when someone shoots someone else with a gun they made.

Do you also think car manufacturers should be liable for automobile accidents?

What about refrigerators? Is it the manufacturers fault when your food spoils? No wait, it must be the electric company's fault for not supplying enough power.

This broken logic has no place here.

Re: Sorry NO

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you also think car manufacturers should be liable for automobile accidents?

Um, they can be. That is one of the reasons for recalls, after all.

Re:Sorry NO

[Knuckles]

Germany can not sue ...

Quite irrelevant since Germany does not sue. From TFS, "the complaint comes from the Wurzburg-based attorney Chan-jo Jun"

Re:Sorry NO

[Baloroth]

Except that OP's logic is the same as that being used in the suit against Facebook. The ridiculousness of the logic is OP's entire point. Facebook didn't commit, incite, or in any way encourage the hate speech. All they did was offer a platform that allowed others to engage in it. They even actively moved to remove the illegal content, they just (allegedly) didn't do so quickly enough. The suit is holding Facebook responsible not for anything they did, but for something others did with their platform.

Re:Sorry NO

[grep -v '.*' *]

You must be one those people who thinks gun manufacturers are liable when someone shoots someone else with a gun they made.

You should only sue a gun manufacturers when the gun DOESN'T work and it's actually not your fault.

"Gun control means hitting your target." -- I told that as an offhand comment once to a self-proclaimed hippy, and she thought that was like the funniest thing she had ever heard; she laughed about it for over 10 minutes and chuckled for even longer.

OTOH, I was serious, and wasn't laughing for any of it.

Re:Sorry NO

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

who is in private practice.
This is his second attempt, the first one was in October 2015 (German language). Here is a link for the new one dated 30 September (also German). The difference appears to be that the Munich prosecutors are actually looking at it.

Re:Sorry NO

[angel'o'sphere]

Germany must also sue itself. The German government chose not to block Facebook and hence the German government itself is liable.
That is nonsense. There is no legal basis to block Facebook, ever heard ... cough cough ... about free speech? And Germany as a state is not responsible for FB not removing hate speech when it gets asked to do so.

Re:Sorry NO

[Anonymous Coward]

What if I'm selling poison cupcakes?

Then someone feeds those poison cupcakes a classroom of second graders and they all die.

Cupcakes don't kill people, people kill people, right?

2A zealots find a justification for their fetish then stop thinking.

Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[DarkOx]

This happening to FB is ironic in that they advocated for the hand over, but this is how the rest of the world is going to treat freedom of speech online.

It was shameful shameful thing we did handing off the control to the UN.

This is a good example of where our state department ought to stand up for an American company. The message to Germany ought to be

"Screw you guys its an American website, Zuck can publish whatever the hell he wants and if you try to come after him or his assets we would be forced to retaliate against German citizens and German companies with assets in the USA. If you don't like his website, firewall it"

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[phantomfive]

Freedom of speech is a necessary pre-requisite for freedom, so it's worth mentioning:

The reason Germany has such strict anti-speech laws is actually a tool of oppression from the allies. They didn't want to have another uprising like Hitler leading into World War 3 (also part of the reason the US has military bases in Germany), so they took measures to ensure Hitler's specific type of propaganda would be oppressed.

So Germany is not an example to the world here, but neither were the laws intended to be.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason Germany has such strict anti-speech laws is actually a tool of oppression from the allies. They didn't want to have another uprising like Hitler leading into World War 3 (also part of the reason the US has military bases in Germany), so they took measures to ensure Hitler's specific type of propaganda would be oppressed.

Well, that's certainly one way to spin it.

A more honest way would be to admit that Germany is embarrassed by its past and so it tries to whitewash history and pretend that Hitler, and everything associated with him, never existed. What better way to do that than prohibit anyone from talking about it.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Calydor]

And the US certainly isn't trying to make everyone forget the slave period ever existed by banning any kind of racist speech and rewriting literary classics to be politically correct, right?

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[phantomfive]

tries to ... pretend that Hitler, and everything associated with him, never existed

Except that's not true.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

That's your opinion. And it's wrong.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Knuckles]

Well, that's certainly one way to spin it.

A more honest way would be to admit that Germany is embarrassed by its past and so it tries to whitewash history and pretend that Hitler, and everything associated with him, never existed. What better way to do that than prohibit anyone from talking about it.

Wow, you know nothing. This was true for the majority during the early part of the cold war, but Germany has become quite exemplary in dealing with a troubled past and the country is plastered with memorials and documentation centers of a high standard. Maybe you should visit instead of talking out of your ass.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

That's your opinion. And it's wrong.

Opinions generally cannot be right or wrong. If it's factually incorrect then it's a false statement, not an opinion. At that point, calling it an "opinion" is just a (treacherous or misguided) effort to deflect scrutiny. To illustrate:

In my opinion, red wine tastes better than white wine.

In my opinion, two plus two equals seven thousand.

One of those is a valid opinion. The other is just plain wrong.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[ogdenk]

"Screw you guys its an American website, Zuck can publish whatever the hell he wants and if you try to come after him or his assets we would be forced to retaliate against German citizens and German companies with assets in the USA. If you don't like his website, firewall it"

If it were me, I'd just shut down local operations in Germany, block '.de' and let the Nazis that believe in thought crime and want to suppress free speech stay in their safe space.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[phantomfive]

Here's what's been whitewashed (by both the Germans and the Americans):

Anti-Jewish sentiment in Germany was enormous before Hitler. Hitler wasn't some propaganda monster, he merely tapped into a current of hate that already existed. The hate that existed against Jews in Germany (and Austria) is disgusting. Look at some of the things Wagner said about Mendelssohn as one small example. Mahler was surrounded by hate for a decade merely because of his ancestry.

The Nuremberg show trials were show trials exactly for that reason: so we could blame it all on the leaders, and get over hating each other.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

The German's should be grateful the US returned their sovereignty over west Germany instead of making them another US state. Ditto for Japan. The US spent enormous amounts money and effort rebuilding these countries from the ground up into two of the most successful countries in the world. And the US efforts were not altruistic. The US benefitted by creating lucrative trade partners as well as staunch military and political allies. But the US has made mistakes trying to do the same thing with other countries and have had little to no success.

The US tried to accomplish the same thing in Iraq but the Iraqi's refused to cooperate and help themselves. Every single ME country is bereft of any competent leadership. They either bow down to brutal military dictators or allow themselves to be ruled by religious demigods using outdated and extreme religious dogma. The last successful ME leader who addressed reality by negotiating with Egypt's enemies while looking out for his country men. He knew that in order to move from hostility to cooperation required both parties to admit past mistakes and controversies in the past and look towards the future. And in the end he was assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood in cooperation with the PLO whose crimes dwarf those of any of today's well known terrorist groups.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[dcw3]

That's your opinion. And it's wrong.

Having lived there for six years, I'll just say that you're full of shit.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[DivineKnight]

If they don't want another Hitler, they shouldn't focus their efforts on propaganda, but on heavily regulating methamphetamines.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

The irony is that the oppression that was put onto German citizens after WWI is what led to WWII. People can only take so much before they reach a breaking point. The social justice warrior crowd hasn't learned this yet, which is why they will be shocked when they get hit with massive blow-back once the public has decided they've had enough of their sanctimonious horse shit.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

Germany is embarrassed by its past and so it tries to whitewash history and pretend that Hitler, and everything associated with him, never existed.

Wer ist Hitler?
Ich habe noch nie von ihm gehört.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

There's also erasure of history with respect to statues, university buildings, etc. That's not quite about forgetting slavery; it's actually a cop out, so that people who consider themselves victims of slavery don't have to face they fact that they are personally benefitting from it's legacy.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, what ?

That's specifically the opposite of all the Germans I ever met, and specifically the opposite of the laws in question. Denying it is in fact illegal.

Re: Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say less white-washed, and more diluted or faded. The only people who learn the particulars of anti-Semitism are those with an interest in it, either to practice it, or oppose it. Or even the rest of Nazi ideology, or the details of the second World War.

Which even bothers the Polish, who really don't like the terminology of "Polish Death Camp" for various reasons.

And one day...perhaps.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

This happening to FB is ironic in that they advocated for the hand over, but this is how the rest of the world is going to treat freedom of speech online.

It was shameful shameful thing we did handing off the control to the UN.

This is a good example of where our state department ought to stand up for an American company. The message to Germany ought to be

"Screw you guys its an American website, Zuck can publish whatever the hell he wants and if you try to come after him or his assets we would be forced to retaliate against German citizens and German companies with assets in the USA. If you don't like his website, firewall it"

The handover wasn't to the UN. It was to ICANN, which already has an advisory board of the world's nations. ICANN hasn't changed since the handover, and a German court suing FaceBook has absolutely nothing to do with the handover.
The USA has pretty much the world's most hostile record of using the courts to go after foreign nationals because internet. The USA has never once decided to firewall a site to deal with the problem. Instead, they seize DNS records or get foreign governments to raid and seize servers on behalf of American rights-holders.
Would you be the first to complain if the situation were reversed? If some foreign app was just doing their own thing that violated US law, and they told the USA to suck it because it's not a US website? I bet you would. Good old America Fuck Yeah!!!

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

boycott bwm, volkswagen, porsche...

Re: Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a shame the US never applied their resources to the goal of teaching proper apostrophe use.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you calling out German speakers only? Seems like you're engaged in a lot of whitewashing yourself. Anti-Jewish sentiment has a been found throughout the world for thousands of years. The reason is simple: Jews are intensely tribal and their code of conduct justifies damn near any behavior as long as the target is non-Jewish.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[moronoxyd]

A more honest way would be to admit that Germany is embarrassed by its past and so it tries to whitewash history and pretend that Hitler, and everything associated with him, never existed. What better way to do that than prohibit anyone from talking about it.

Except that's not what happens. Talking about Hitler and the Third Reich is not forbidden. Students learn about it in history class. There are exhibits in museums, at sites of former concentration camps, books are written, films are shot, and more.

What's forbidden is GLORIFYING what Hitler and the Nazis did. Or denying that the Holocaust happened.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

Hitler was 1/4 Jewish on his mother's side. He was an impoverished loser just trying to survive right up until the outbreak of WW1 - that allowed him to volunteer and be looked after.
The Jews looked after each other, they gave each other work and generally made sure that they were doing ok. If he had been half-jewish he would have had access to that network. Hate, hate, froths at mouth, hate, hate . . .

Hitler came out of WW1 in a far better situation than before the war. To his mind, war had allowed his natural qualities to show through and he floated to the top. War was g-o-o-d.

War was good and the Jews were bad. Everything was s-o-o-o simple. He took over a minor party, spread the word and made it so.
All the lies they told, all means to justify their insane ends.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

... he merely tapped into a current of hate that already existed.

Racial or religious hatred is blamed for many massacres and wars but look behind the blame-game and a strong political motive is easy to find.

... could blame it all on the leaders ...

To also proclaim the US as the heroes and make any war crimes unimportant: This is the winners writing history.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[rastos1]

The reason Germany has such strict anti-speech laws is actually a tool of oppression from the allies.

The reason Germany (and most of EU) has such strict anti hate-speach laws is that people are idiots and can be swayed to do terrible and idiotic things. We have seen it first hand.

Btw, don't think that can't happen in US. The difference between US and EU in this, is only in where they draw the line.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[angel'o'sphere]

Anti-Jewish sentiment in Germany was enormous before Hitler.
That is not true.
Hitler wasn't some propaganda monster,
He was. But even more "good" in that area was Goebbles. ... he merely tapped into a current of hate that already existed.
Probably, but not to such an extend as you make us believe here.
The hate that existed against Jews in Germany (and Austria) is disgusting.
Like in our days people did not really care about religion or ancestry.

The haters are a small minority, unfortunately there is a big passive mass of people that swings with public expressions, only need to look at the new parties like AFD.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[phantomfive]

Anti-Jewish sentiment in Germany was enormous before Hitler. That is not true.

Oh, yes it is. The anti-Jewishness goes back far.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone was on vacation!

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[angel'o'sphere]

Oh, yes it is. The anti-Jewishness goes back far.

Yes, but not in the sense you implied before.

It always was a minority and mainly the rulers who spread anti jewish hate and laws to exploit them.

However there was no "general hatred" ... actually the percentage of jews was quite high in the german population. It is not really plausible that they would stay in Germany if everyone hated them.

I for my part don't know anyone who has resentments against Jews, or if he had would dare to share them in public.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[phantomfive]

It always was a minority

Why on earth do you think it was minority? Defend yourself. In the 1700s, Jews were listed with animals in inventories and such.

I for my part don't know anyone who has resentments against Jews

Good, that's good.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[ckatko]

Then what was the reason for us NOT executing Emperor Hirohito? Japan committed tons of horrific war crimes under him. But they choose to keep him in power (and he got till live till freaking 1989).

By your logic then, we DIDN'T blame the leaders so we COULDN'T get over hating each other.

Something doesn't add up here.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

A more honest way would be to admit that Germany is embarrassed by its past and so it tries to whitewash history and pretend that Hitler, and everything associated with him, never existed. What better way to do that than prohibit anyone from talking about it.

If there is one thing Germany has never done, it is attempting to whitewash its past. Almost every country can learn a lot from how Germany deals with all the terrible things that happened during the Nazi era. Especially countries with a national superiority complex (such as the USA).

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet you keep wondering why the entire world thinks most Americans are idiots...

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[phantomfive]

Maybe if they had executed Hirohito, the Japanese would have been forgiven for their war crimes more than they are now.

Different people were in charge of the different regions after the war, so you shouldn't expect the treatment to be the same. Japan was oppressed in different ways (and many Japanese still consider themselves to be a vassal state).

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Raenex]

Then what was the reason for us NOT executing Emperor Hirohito?

Probably because Japan unconditionally surrendered and he was useful as a puppet for propaganda reasons.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

That's nonsense. You can talk about it in almost any non-glorifying way possible.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[Anonymous Coward]

Your right and the US government also tries to hide what happened to Native Americans for over 500 years and is still ongoing.

Re:Why we never should handed over control of DNS

[angel'o'sphere]

In the 1700s, Jews were listed with animals in inventories and such.
In what kind of "inventory"?

You might want to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... or translate the german version with translate.google.com.

Your ideas about Jew in germany and europe after the trimes of the great plagues are simply wrong, sorry.

but of course

[ooloorie]

Laws regulating hate speech in Germany are extremely tight, with most Nazi symbolism and racist propaganda strictly forbidden, a legacy of Germany's role in World War II.

One of the primary characteristics of the Nazi regime was its suppression of free speech and control of the media by the German government. It is depressing that, rather than defend free speech, Germans have learned nothing from their history.

Re:but of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, the people have learned, just the loudmouthed SJWs who have infected government try to push their world view through by all means. They are too stupid to realize that fascism has nothing to do with symbols, but everything to do with suppressing free expression and intolerance of other peoples' opinions.

Re:but of course

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what you get for not executing every Nazi party member after the war, cleaning up is once again left for the children.. ;) (Is there a perverse, or psychopathic winking smiley, by the way?)

Re: but of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, but they have learned. They've learned to shut up the Baby Hitlers before they get out of hand.

That is an important lesson.

Re:but of course

[Knuckles]

It's a result from the post-war period when there really was no other choice, and nowadays free Nazi speech would simply be too annoying for no gain, and no, it would not be a gain for free speech.

Re:but of course

[misexistentialist]

Everyone learned how effective the Nazis were so naturally they want to follow their example. Pretty obvious when you see Jews calling for the government to confiscate all weapons, ignoring the groups that fought Hitler with the limited weapons they could find, but glorifying those who passively were victims of government.

Re:but of course

[Anonymous Coward]

It's depressing to read comments like this.
While it is true that free speech is far too restricted in Germany and easily used as an ad hominem to shut people up, in this case it's not "the Germans". It's a lawyer representing either themselves or some other private entities that want to sue Facebook (I don't have more information on who that layer is representing). So far they were successful in starting an investigation by the 'district attorneys' Munich, who are investigating if there even is a case to be made. And since everyone has the right to sue, the court in Munich is just doing its job.

Re:but of course

[Anonymous Coward]

"I knew Joseph Goebbels, Frau Merkel, and you are no Joseph Goebbels."

Well, the Western Germans skipped out on really learning or atoning by reinventing themselves as the good Germans who were our allies in opposing the Soviet bloc. Meanwhile, the Eastern Germans just traded in their brown shirts for communist blue shirts and remained frozen in amber until reunification.

Germany merely gestures to its past and virtue postures; it doesn't learn from it. As a result, the culture is neurotic as fuck.

Re:but of course

[drinkypoo]

and nowadays free Nazi speech would simply be too annoying for no gain, and no, it would not be a gain for free speech

Free speech is a concept, it doesn't get gains. We do, unless we subvert the whole idea. And when you ban people talking about things, they only talk about them in secret and deprive you of the opportunity to keep tabs on their stupidity.

Germany's banning of even discussing Nazism is foolish at best.

Re:but of course

[thegarbz]

They seemed to have learnt a lot. From what I remember the fall of Nazi Germany was a war, not an uprising of the people. The lesson from back then was that suppression of free speech worked and worked well.

Re:but of course

[moronoxyd]

Germany's banning of even discussing Nazism is foolish at best.

How about you first learn what exactly is banned in Germany before you judge?
Discussing Nazism is NOT forbidden. Forbidden is glorifying the Nazis and the Third Reich or denying facts like the existence of concentration camps or that the Holocaust happened.

Re:but of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh fuck off. That law was created by the occupation forces.

Re:but of course

[Knuckles]

What @moronoxyd said in the other reply. Nothing worthwhile comes from people denying the Holocaust, and not having that does not undermine anything

Re:but of course

[angel'o'sphere]

One of the primary characteristics of the Nazi regime was its suppression of free speech and control of the media by the German government.
Suppressing free speech on one side and having anti hate speech laws on the other side have nothing much to do with each other.
We have the same free speech laws in Europe (not only Germany) as you in the USA, with one minimal restriction: holocoust denial and hate speech are prohibited. Display of Nazi symbols are prohibited.

It is depressing that, rather than defend free speech, Germans have learned nothing from their history.
No, what depressing is, is that people like you don't grasp the difference of the concepts above.

And, JFYI: those laws were more or less forced on us by the occupying parties at the end resp. after WWII. So you have to pack your own nose :D

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

Discussing Nazism is NOT forbidden. Forbidden is glorifying the Nazis and the Third Reich or denying facts like the existence of concentration camps or that the Holocaust happened.

What is forbidden is whatever the people in power want to forbid, and what they usually forbid is things that threaten their power.

In Germany, it's generally illegal to insult the head of state, as well as to refer to politicians, police, and other government officials as "Nazis" or "fascists".

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

We have the same free speech laws in Europe (not only Germany) as you in the USA, with one minimal restriction: holocoust denial and hate speech are prohibited. Display of Nazi symbols are prohibited.

You don't know what you are talking about. German restrictions on free speech are extensive, and different from much of Western Europe, and radically different from the US. Germany has criminal laws against insults, defamation, and slander. Germany has special criminal laws against defaming politicians, expressing contempt towards Germany, its constitution, or its symbols. Defaming the deceased is illegal. Blasphemy is illegal. No such criminal laws exist in the US.

And, JFYI: those laws were more or less forced on us by the occupying parties at the end resp. after WWII.

No, they werent. Post-WWII law was worked out in cooperation between the Allies and Germany; it was not dictated to Germany like post-WWI restrictions. And the restrictions allies were concerned with were restrictions on the glorification of Nazism and restrictions on antisemitism, for the simple reason that large parts of the German government, police, educational institutions, and business leadership were former Nazis (they are now mostly dead).

The German obsession with criminalizing speech in general has nothing to do with the Allies or WWII and goes back to long before the 20th century. Furthermore, since the early 1990's, Germany is pretty much free to do whatever it wants to.

Note that I didn't lament that Germans still have these restrictions per se, what I lamented is that Germans haven't learned from their Nazi past. In particular, even though these restrictions are still in place, they seem to be ineffective in dealing with Germany's massive and growing neo-Nazi problem. The fact that Germany still has these laws on the book is merely a symptom of deep-running problems with German democracy and society.

Re:but of course

[angel'o'sphere]

Germany has criminal laws against insults, defamation, and slander.
No, we have not. That are civil laws just like in the USA.

Germany has special criminal laws against defaming politicians,
No we have not. The only criminal law in regard of that is insulting foreign politicians.
expressing contempt towards Germany, its constitution, or its symbols.
That is completely wrong.

Defaming the deceased is illegal
Yes, as it is in most countries.

Blasphemy is illegal.
No it is not.

No such criminal laws exist in the US. as I pointed out: those laws are in most cases civil laws and not criminal laws. And yes: most of them exist in the USA as well. Perhaps you should learn to google for them?

The fact that Germany still has these laws on the book is merely a symptom of deep-running problems with German democracy and society.
Germany consists of two countries that got forcefully united, similar as they got forcefully divided after/during WWII. What do you expect if a semi Nazi country gets integrated into a democratic one?

In particular, even though these restrictions are still in place, they seem to be ineffective in dealing with Germany's massive and growing neo-Nazi problem.
Of course they are. Anti hate speech laws don't prevent people from hating ...

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

Germany has criminal laws against insults, defamation, and slander.

No, we have not. That are civil laws just like in the USA

Criminal libel is defined in Art 185-189 of the German criminal code, as well as Art 90 (defamation of the state), and Art. 166 (defamation of religions). Art 130 criminalizes "defaming segments of the population".

Seriously, you need to get a clue about what's going on in your own country.

Re:but of course

[angel'o'sphere]

Regarding 185 there you might have a point. However it is not executed, unless the person who got "insulted" causes a case. In other words if a policeman is standing right beside me when I insult you, no one would charge me unless you do. In other words it is dead law ...

The other paragraphs (186-189) are not libel related. And ofc I'm completely ok with them.

Then again: A90, did you read the last paragraph? As long as the President is not going to court, there is no case. And then again: you claimed "any politician". It is obviously clear now it is only concerns "head of states". Would be a bit silly if we would protect foreign head of states from insults but missed our own president, or not?

Art 166, is not balsphemy as you claimed before, it is about defamation of religions ... face palm. And Art 130, is one of those the whole article in which we are posting is about, hate speech. Sigh, that was easy.

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

Art 166, is not balsphemy as you claimed before, it is about defamation of religions ... face palm.

It's generally considered a blasphemy law.

Then again: A90, did you read the last paragraph? As long as the President is not going to court, there is no case.

And that affects the truth of my statement... how?

And then again: you claimed "any politician". It is obviously clear now it is only concerns "head of states".

Sorry, wrong again. Defamation of the German head of state is covered under Art 90. Defamation of foreign heads of states and symbols is covered under Art 103/104. Defamation of other politicians is covered under Art 188 (prison sentences run between 6 months and five years).

And ofc I'm completely ok with them.

So? What do I care what an ignorant proto-Nazi like you "is OK with"?

Re:but of course

[angel'o'sphere]

Of course that are different paragraphs/articles, facepalm.

About what again are you nitpicking?

You claimed "germany has laws against insults towards politicians". Which sounds like a general rule towards all politicians.

I pointed out: you are wrong. So? Now you want to weasel around or what?

The only positions that are protected by law are heads of state, our own state and others.

And yes: I'm fine with that. If you are not, that is your problem, not mine.

Why that makes me a Nazi is up to you.

Regarding the "blasphemy" law, no idea who considers it like that. Actually every religion defines by itself what "blasphemy" is. There is no general law that defines what islamic, judaic, or christian blasphemy is.

Again, I and most of my co germans, are ok with laws that protect religions.

You have to accept that some countries have different ideas.

You think "free speech" (what ever that means in your country) is above "civil order", "protection of citizens", "safety to perform your religion".

We believe, giving our history, that the right to perform your religion without interferences is above "free speech" in regards to religions.

You seem to believe that "free speech" is an universal right, we believe "performing your religion" is an universal right.

Go figure.

Regarding all your examples you are right, we have some restrictions. Which I admitted in my first post. And we have no restrictions what so ever regarding everything else, just exactly as in your country. So for fuck sake ... what is your problem?

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

You claimed "germany has laws against insults towards politicians". Which sounds like a general rule towards all politicians.

Well, yes, that's what it is..

You have to accept that some countries have different ideas.

I fully accept that Germany is different from the US, which is why I like using Germany as a negative example for what the US shouldn't do.

Which I admitted in my first post.

Yeah, sure, whatever.

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

You seem to believe that "free speech" is an universal right, we believe "performing your religion" is an universal right.

What is at issue is not what people "believe", but what states actually deliver; sadly, both freedom of speech and freedom of religion are seriously curtailed in Germany.

You think "free speech" (what ever that means in your country)

I encourage you to read up on it; you might learn something.

Re:but of course

[angel'o'sphere]

As I said before: our free speech is the same as yours.

It is restricted in 4 cases only and most people agree with such restrictions. I most certainly do.

Your believe that you have more freedom just because your restrictions are not coded in laws but in court cases is simply idiotic.

sadly, both freedom of speech and freedom of religion are seriously curtailed in Germany.
They aren't. You can perform any religion you want ... unless it contains practices e.g. rape or human sacrifices which are obviously against other laws.

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

As I said before: our free speech is the same as yours.

We have already established that that is false, with half a dozen German laws criminalizing various forms of speech.

Your believe that you have more freedom just because your restrictions are not coded in laws but in court cases is simply idiotic.

What is "idiotic" is that you don't understand the fundamental difference between a country that can throw you in jail just for insulting someone vs a country that cannot do that.

They aren't. You can perform any religion you want ... unless it contains practices e.g. rape or human sacrifices which are obviously against other laws.

The German government massively subsidizes and supports certain politically connected and favored religions while denouncing others. As a German tax payer, you are even required to declare your religion to the government. That is not "freedom of religion". In fact, many of those laws were established during the Nazi era, which makes the whole thing even worse. And the fact that you ignorantly try to defend this crap shows how little Germans have learned, and how much of the old Nazi structures survive in Germany.

Re:but of course

[angel'o'sphere]

We have already established that that is false, with half a dozen German laws criminalizing various forms of speech.
No, we have established that it is true, except for those few laws you cited. Facepalm.

What is "idiotic" is that you don't understand the fundamental difference between a country that can throw you in jail just for insulting someone vs a country that cannot do that.
Actually this did not happen since decades. So?
And actually, you can be punished in your country for the same things, as soon as the victim sues you. The difference is marginal ... you seem not to get that.

The German government massively subsidizes and supports certain politically connected and favored religions while denouncing others.
That is a myth. There is no state / government money going to any religious organization in Germany.

as a German tax payer, you are even required to declare your religion to the government.
Yes, because if you are protestant or catholic on the tax paper you pay a fraction of your taxes as church tax. That is why everyone puts there a "no religion". And if you are from any other religion, you pay no church tax at all, so you simply check "other" ... no idea why you think this restricts your freedom.
However there are people like me, who simply quit church at age of 14 when we can decide by law about our religion by our selves. Which has the nice side effect that we have not to go to the 2 or 3 hours religion school classes per week anymore. So, if you want to talk about religious freedom: children under 14 can be forced by law or parents to go to religion classes. No idea how that is in your country.

And the fact that you ignorantly try to defend this crap shows how little Germans have learned, and how much of the old Nazi structures survive in Germany.
This is an idiotic claim as there is no logical or rational conclusion between the two things. Especially when you consider that in the USA you likely ave more Nazis than Germany has population ... KKK etc. or call they themselves KKC ... no idea.

Re:but of course

[ooloorie]

You are a credit to your country.

interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

they probably are just trying to create more action in removing that kind of rhetoric.

if its not being actively removed the owner must support it?

Social media giants should pull out of Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

Facebook and Twitter have gone so far to prove their "tolerance" that they have verifiable Stalinists and Muslim Brothers on their moderation staff censoring everything like they're the second coming of Frederick Wertham. Ironically, under American law as I understand it this makes them liable for everything else that they don't censor.

Stop it. Close your German offices, pull out of the bad parts of Europe, and give them the middle finger on your way out. IP-block their countries if they keep complaining. You should have noticed when the government hired rioters to smash your office windows that they don't want you there.

Re:Social media giants should pull out of Germany

[rudy_wayne]

Ironically, under American law as I understand it this makes them liable for everything else that they don't censor.

No it doesn't.

As a private business, Facebook can prohibit, or "censor" anything they want.

Re:Social media giants should pull out of Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop it. Close your German offices, pull out of the bad parts of Europe, and give them the middle finger on your way out. IP-block their countries if they keep complaining. You should have noticed when the government hired rioters to smash your office windows that they don't want you there.

Um, can you substantiate any of this? You seem to be implying that the government of Germany hired thugs ("rioters") to give FB some property damage and (I would assume) some concomittant intimidation. Got a link?

Re:Social media giants should pull out of Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, under American law as I understand it this makes them liable for everything else that they don't censor.

No it doesn't.

As a private business, Facebook can prohibit, or "censor" anything they want.

That they can-and-may do so has not been disputed. Clearly they can and clearly they may. I'm not a lawyer but I will explain my armchair opinion of it as best I can. I'm trying to illustrate a basic principle, not give you an accurate model of how the legal system(s) actually work. So then:

What's in question is whether censorship of some content will be construed as approval for anything not censored. To put that another way - the act of assuming this kind of control implies having the capability to do so, therefore, anything bad that's not controlled is their fault. It's the concept of a common carrier".

Phone companies aren't held legally liable when someone uses telephone communication to plan a crime. This is partly or wholly because they don't attempt to censor or filter anything, thus there is no implied approval for any content and they're merely a neutral carrier which is not liable. So, this news article raises questions about whether this kind of logic will be applied to Facebook. But that an online company *can* control how its own severs and networks are used, well that's a given, or else there couldn't be these questions.

Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Qbertino]

Dude, you got just about *everything* wrong in that headline. The only correct thing is "Mark Zuckerberg".

No trial. The Attorney Generals of Munich are investigating against Mark Zuckerberg. Big difference.
And it's not for inciting hatred. It is for enabling "Hate Speech". Big difference.

If it ever comes to a trial, I wonder how well this holds up in court.
I doubt it will come to a trial.

Re:Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, you got just about *everything* wrong in that headline. The only correct thing is "Mark Zuckerberg"

Um, there's no Mark in the headline.

Re:Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

The headline said "Munich Court To Try Facebook's Zuckerberg For Inciting Hatred." Maybe it meant that they will try Zuckerberg as a means for inciting hatred. If so, I think they'll succeed. After all, a lot of us hate him already.

Re:Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're quibbling about the headline, Germany is eating itself alive. The good news is the current German government is going down in flames. The bad news is what replaces them.

Europe is on death watch - the liberal progressive governments won't exist in another decade or two given the demographics. But I fear the continent will be in another massive war to rival the past.

Re:Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't they just gas him and let it go at that?

Re:Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're quibbling about the headline, Germany is eating itself alive. The good news is the current German government is going down in flames. The bad news is what replaces them.

Europe is on death watch - the liberal progressive governments won't exist in another decade or two given the demographics. But I fear the continent will be in another massive war to rival the past.

That's what happens when you let Muslims overrun a place. Europe is absolutely infested with a rapid growing Muslim population to the point that it is disruptive to those countries. France is a good example. Remember how the Crusades got started?? A lot of cultures have done this (displace local populations) throughout history, and it happens that the Muslims are among the best at it. I suspect it helps having a common religion with such strict rules about recruiting new members.

Funny how "multiculturalism" always means "the more prosperous, technologically advanced cultures with the (relatively) better human rights record must welcome and accommodate the more oppressive, backward, more abusive culture, because skin color!"

Re:Wrong and wrong. And wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

The criminal investigation is in Germany, not in California.

The Fourth Reich is Rising!

[Anonymous Coward]

By the time Germany is done banning everything they will end up with another genocide. They just can't help themselves. They are doomed to repeat history again.

Re:The Fourth Reich is Rising!

[moronoxyd]

Fun fact: The laws in question here have been pretty much unchanged in 60 years.
And Germany had 60+ years of (relative) peace. If you look at the history of Germany and western Europe, you will see that 60 years of peace is almost unheard of.

The current laws in Germany are not perfect. But they are based on the experiences we Germans made in the 100+ years leading up to the formation of our current state. Everything we learned from the horrors of the Third Reich, the deficiencies of the Weimar Republic, the imperialism of the German Empire and further back.
And the result is not perfect, but better than everything we had before.

Re:The Fourth Reich is Rising!

[Anonymous Coward]

Fun fact: 60+ years later and you are still repeating the same mistakes but just in a different direction. How are those "unattached" laws working for ya? Maybe it's time you give the Germans some human rights like Freedom of Speech!

Re:The Fourth Reich is Rising!

[Anonymous Coward]

unchanged*

Unless there's been a coup

[Anonymous Coward]

Mark Zuckerberg is Facebook's current CEO while Sheryl Sandberg is 'merely' Facebook's COO #PatriarchalOppression.

Who knew?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well if you invite a million people from other cultures into your country, then apparently your own citizens are going to be a bit upset. The only sane way to handle their feelings is obviously to ban free speech. Oh, wait...

Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

So the kike is getting sued for inciting holocaust denial. 2016 just keeps getting better!

A little reminder

[LeftCoastThinker]

If I were Zuckerberg, I would remind the German fascists that he is Jewish and then block all German Facebook accounts, instead showing a big banner saying that Germany hates free speech and/or Jewish run businesses and put up the name and office phone number of the Attourneys General for everyone to complain to.

Re:A little reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that's grounds to sue for breach of privacy.

Another charger to add to the list

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he's a witch too!

He and his company/coven always seems to know who I'm talking to and constantly tries selling me stuff related to things I said in completely private online conversations.

Good

[frovingslosh]

It is about time. He has certainly incited a lot of hatred in me.

Thank you nice peaceful Germans for confirming that my hatred doesn't indicate anything wrong with me, it is caused by Zukerberg. Get him!

No leg to stand..

[XSportSeeker]

You can hate Facebook and Zuckerberg all you want, but this particular idea won't do anyone favors...
I mean, if something like this passes, next will be YouTube, Google in general, Reddit, Twitter, Steam, almost any other social network, forum, or virtual space where people gather to comment.

The problem here is not about hate speech, but about defining what exactly is an acceptable time frame for removing offending content on portals that have millions to billions of users. It's a technical limitation. No company is big enough or has enough money to hire an unimaginable number of people to keep a watchful eye towards all the content being published on the platform in a daily basis, and we all know that even modern AI automated systems have their own limitations. An attorney cannot demand that a company produces something out of nowhere that will solve such technical issues. But of course, these lawsuits usually comes from people who have zero understanding of how these things work.

Push an automated system too hard, you have protests like the one Facebook just faced with removal of the Napalm Girl image. I'm pretty sure they'd also have lawsuits thrown at them regarding freedom of speech and whatnot should they start removing any comment that fell in some category of hate speech.

And in the end, this solves nothing. People who use the internet to spread hate speech and harass others are still there. The solution, much in the same way, is to pursue those people and apply heavy penalties against them. Put laws in place that enable individuals to go against abusers and detractors, not try to put all the burden into the platforms itself. But oh, the justice system doesn't have enough people to work on that, and the police can't go after every case that happens. Yep. It goes both ways.

Germany, has never been a democracy

[pigsycyberbully]

Germany, has never been a democracy and has never believed in free speech. At the end of the war the British, introduced the slogan "crossing bridges" to teach Germans about democracy. I don't like the Germans, to be honest I worked there for a year there is a saying ( people go for holidays in Cornwall Spain, France, Canada the U.S. Asia but nobody goes for a holiday in Germany ). Europeans will travel to Amsterdam, and Thailand, and so on but nobody wants to go to Germany.. I noticed that when ever they argued they called each other "turniphead"

I was invited to a English, football game they were playing against Germany. The English, started humming and it started off quietly and then began to get louder and louder! and they were all humming! The humming was so loud it was going through my body a crazy sensation I just started laughing to myself and I couldn't hear myself laughing!

They were humming the theme tune to the Dam Busters. I watched the film and n i g g e r the dog was dubbed out in the television version but it was available on the DVD. It's a crazy world....
Filter error: Lameness filter encountered

Re:Germany, has never been a democracy

[moronoxyd]

Europeans will travel to Amsterdam, and Thailand, and so on but nobody wants to go to Germany..

Well, I'm living in Berlin, but I guess all the British and Spanish and French people I thought I see on the streets every day are just in my head, right?

Shouldn't they sue paper manufacturers?

[presidenteloco]

An awful lot of illegal things, including hate speech, and hateful images, have been written on, drawn on, or printed on paper.

Equally valid t blaming facebook for user content. Equally ridiculous.

Re:Shouldn't they sue paper manufacturers?

[moronoxyd]

No, thats not equal.

Once the paper leave the manufacturing plant, the paper manufacturers don't have any control over what happens with their paper.
But Facebook can control what messages are distributed using their services. And they do: They are fast to remove anything they consider erotic by the somewhat prude US standards, but they lag when it comes to complying with actual laws of the countries they are active in.

Re:Shouldn't they sue paper manufacturers?

[Anonymous Coward]

Equally valid t blaming facebook for user content. Equally ridiculous.

Facebook has shown in the past that it has automatic censoring and manual censoring in place. Since they are already censoring everything they don't like they may as well censor things that are actually illegal. Also it is often mentioned when corporate censorship comes up that facebook is privately owned and your right to free speech does not apply to privately owned property.

Re: Shouldn't they sue paper manufacturers?

[DulcetTone]

But if paper manufacturers COULD do such a thing, it's fair to legally REQUIRE them to do so? #listentoyourself

I've never had anything good to say about Facebook

[Trax3001BBS]

But I'm behind them on this one.

europe needs a new person like hitler

[Anonymous Coward]

the way europe is going down the fucking tubes with enormous swarms of muslim invaders the continent desperately needs another person like hitler - not one who would go on an idiotic killing rampage but one who is just as ruthless, would awaken enthusiasm and pride of the people of europe, and kick the invaders the fuck out of the continent.

in other news, sweden had a record number of cases of sexual abuse again last year.

people who deny the holocaust are just as stupid as people who support the idiot that hitler was. that said, the way he roused the germanic peoples was a good thing and its sickening to watch europeans go extinct in their own countries as they are destroyed by sociopathic "leeaders"

Re:europe needs a new person like hitler

[Zontar The Mindless]

Sverigedemokraten hittades.

A faster way

[WaffleMonster]

The Holocaust obviously never happened. If it really did happen then why would IBM name computers after the guy who sold counting machines to Hitler? And why would Sony let said computer compete on Jeopardy?

The Armenian genocide never happened because Turkey a US Ally and fellow NATO member said so.

Darfur never happened because the UN itself said the government of Sudan didn't have an official policy of Genocide.

Stalin was a US Allie. Good ole Uncle Joe as FDR affectionately called him fighting the good fight against Hitler... do you really think he.... NO... of course not..

Any country who worships censorship and thinks silencing people who spew "hate speech" or buy into related crackpottery by force (e.g. violence) is a great idea are most welcome to disconnect themselves from the Internet.

By the way Germany Facebook's ASN is 32934. You can block it any time you damn well please. If you believe Zuckerberg's facebook is an evil hater factory you have all the power in the world to do something about it immediately.

Facebook certainly incites my hatred of Facebook.

Technical solutions

[dumky2]

If the handover of ICANN turns bad, DNS will be replaced by an alternative technical solution. Such solutions are already worked, based on DHT and blockchain storage.

Germany trying to stay in the news.

[Pezbian]

The last thing sharp that came out of that country was spouted by that Hitler dude. And he didn't matter in the long run, either.

Zuckerberg == Sugar Mountain

[No Longer an AC]

I started learning a little German recently and apparently Zuckerberg translates to Sugar Mountain and now every time I read anything about Facebook I hear Neil Young.

With the barkers and the colored balloons, of course.

The article looks to be B.S.

[Vlad_the_Inhaler]

This article appears to be written by someone who understands neither the German legal system nor (probably) the language.

Germany has public prosecutors, I think the US has the same system. This lawyer is in private practice. He has essentially gone to the law-enforcement authorities with a complaint. I looked up a German-language source and it is the second time he has tried this, the first one was in Hamburg last year and it was kicked around for a year before being dropped for "formal reasons".
btw, the article I found was dated 30 September - it just took a while for some English-language site to notice.

No big deal.

Finally, a Frank Herbert quote? "Eternal sloppiness is the price of liberty".
People moan that Google (+ Youtube) is too quick to delete content, people moan that Facebook is too slow. The Norwegian head of state recently got really stroppy with Facebook because they had censored that well known full-frontal picture of a naked girl running down the road after a napalm attack in Vietnam. It is not possible to get this one right.

Facebook has only itself to blame

[mvdwege]

Really, if you ban nudity faster than you can say "b00b13s!" but leave outright hate speech and incitement to violence up, then you shouldn't be surprised that people actually start holding you accountable.

You either police your userbase, or you don't. If you do it halfway, you leave the impression you're taking sides, at best.

And for the libertard crowd who shout "Freeze Peach!"? You're free to create your own Facebook clone. What right do you have to force your idea of perfect user policies on Facebook, according to your own philosophy?

Re:Facebook has only itself to blame

[Raenex]

And for the libertard crowd who shout "Freeze Peach!"?

Oh look, you're using "hate speech" and disparaging two groups of people, those who value liberty and the mentally disabled by using a word derivative of "retard". Please report yourself to the nearest education center.

You're free to create your own Facebook clone. What right do you have to force your idea of perfect user policies on Facebook, according to your own philosophy?

Yes, legally, at least in the United States, Facebook can set their own policies. Most people who advocate for free speech aren't trying to legally force Facebook to do anything. They're, gasp, using their free speech to argue against Facebook's politically biased policies.

Facebook would like to pretend they aren't politically biased and support free speech, because it's a good marketing tool and they don't want to limit their audience to just the left. They should be called out on their bullshit.

Say what you want about Slashdot, but it's always been great about free speech, and I really appreciate that.

That law was imposed by allies

[aepervius]

and never repelled. So if you want to complain about not learning, look at UK, USA, France.

Re:That law was imposed by allies

[Anonymous Coward]

Sssshh. Don't bother the right-wing fucktard with facts.

Re:That law was imposed by allies

[ooloorie]

and never [repealed]

Yes, and for about 20 years, Germans have had the option to repeal such laws.

Breaking: Sealand adds RIAA/MPAA to terrorist list

[CanEHdian]

Sealand, November 5 2016 -- In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the Kopimist Nation of Sealand ruled both RIAA and MPAA to be terrorist organisations, allowing for the rendition of any known RIAA/MPAA members, its agents or close associates "located anywhere in the universe, by any means necessary" to the Kopimist Nation of Sealand to answer for their crimes. The third organization on trial, BSA, was spared the terrorist organisation designation by the Supreme Court, however the racketeering-related convictions from the lower court were confirmed. Full verdict expected to be published in 72 hours. Story to be updated when new details emerge.

Mixed feelings about this

[Anonymous Coward]

On the one hand, any 'moderation' (read as: censorship) of anyones' speech is a Bad Thing.
On the other hand, anything that might help rid the world of the Cancer that is Facebook (and, by extension, all so-called 'social media') is a Good Thing so far as I'm concerned. Especially Facebook.

You want an ultimate platform for freedom of speech? http://www.4chan.org/b
Fact of the matter is, 'freedom of speech' is a messy, messy thing, chaos is the rule not the exception, and like getting drunk with someone, you find out what people are really like, when all the internal societal filters are turned off.

All that being said, this is at least as complex an issue as defining what is and is not 'art', and what is and is not 'pornography'.

What about Soros?

[ebvwfbw]

If anyone in the world should be indicted, how can they possibly miss George Soros. He's the worst thing for Europe since WWII.

Good

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope they hang the filthy kike.

Rules & Law

[Anonymous Coward]

I think facebook has the right/rites for it's members to create what they want on facebook.
Example: In America, tax payers pay the FBI/Home Land Security && they do things for Hollywood/MPAA/DMCA filtering things online through Internet using Tax Payers Monies.
I think Deutchland can also use Tax Payers monies && have law enforcement like America filter things on the Internet, facebook,etc.
The best solution if for companies to follow the laws of the country but then who is going to pay the FBI/Home Land Security? Should it be the MPAA/DMCA that pays the departments within the FBI since they work for MPAA?