[pp.int.general] Companies that trap and sue P2P users in Germany

[Justus Römeth]

It is not, but it has to do with the German ideas of responsibility and
regulation, which are interpreted somewhat different than ins most other
countries. In practice a WEP key is seen as 'enough' by most courts.

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Betiel <betielix at gmail.com> wrote:

> so.. they are asking simple poeple with poor tech knowledge to do what big
> enterprises with lot of expert fail every day to do. That is, to have a
> proper defence against hackers, virus, etc... That doesn´t sound good at
> all.
>
>
> 2012/3/19 Jonas Pöhler <j.poehler at piratenpartei-nrw.de>
>
>> Yes in Germany there is a law called "Störerhaftung". The owner of the
>> line must take security measures to ensure nobody can do something without
>> him knowing.
>>
>> Am 10.03.2012 01:50, schrieb Maxime Rouquet:
>>
>>  On 03/09/2012 10:49 PM, Markus Drenger wrote:
>>>
>>>> in a court case those companies problably win, by providing "evidence"
>>>> recorded by their secret p2p-observer software.
>>>>
>>> With IP address and time, one may identify the owner of an Internet
>>> access, but this does not constitute an evidence. Apart from "false
>>> positive" problems, you have absolutely no certainty whether the user of
>>> the line at that time was the owner... or somebody else.
>>>
>>> In France, courts reject claims about copyright infringement with no
>>> other pieces of evidence (like confessions, police investigation, etc.)
>>>
>>> HADOPI law was a consequence of that : first they tried to get rid of
>>> the judges by giving to the HADOPI the power to disconnect citizens
>>> without a fair trial. When the Constitutional Council censored this
>>> first version, they focused on a "failure to secure" infringement.
>>>
>>> Funny point is that detecting an IP address is no evidence that the
>>> owner of the related Internet access did not secure his connection.
>>> Presumption of innocence asking for the complainant to bring such
>>> evidence, HADOPI is in the same dead end than the previous laws.
>>>
>>> Has a German court ever ruled a case based on such recordings ?
>>> ______________________________**______________________
>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>> pp.international.general@**lists.pirateweb.net<pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/**mailman/listinfo/pp.**international.general<http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general>
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________**______________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general@**lists.pirateweb.net<pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/**mailman/listinfo/pp.**international.general<http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general>
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20120321/d78fc004/attachment.html>