4 ms·

> "Because the German Court has overstepped its jurisdiction, and allowed the world's largest publishing group to bully Project Gutenberg for these 18 books, th

by s3nnyy 9y ago

> "Because the German Court has overstepped its jurisdiction, and allowed the world's largest publishing group to bully Project Gutenberg for these 18 books, there is every reason to think that this will keep happening" Why do German courts think they can overstep jurisdictions?

thenaturalist 9y ago
See, they think they don't. From the court document: > The action is admissible. In particular, the District Court of Frankfurt am Main has international and local jurisdiction pursuant to § 32 ZPO (German Rules of Civil Procedure). According to § 32 ZPO, the court of the district where an unlawful act was committed has jurisdiction for suits brought against such acts. Unlawful acts within the meaning of § 32 ZPO also include copyright infringements. Along with local jurisdiction, this provision also governs the international jurisdiction of German courts. An unlawful act within the meaning of § 32 ZPO is deemed to have been committed both at the place where the offense was committed and at the place where the offense had its effect, so jurisdiction optionally applies to the place where the infringement was committed or where the legally protected interest was affected. A conclusive claim of facts substantiating an unlawful act committed within the judicial district is enough to establish jurisdiction. § 32 ZPO also covers claims for injunctive relief. According to § 32 ZPO, if a copyright or related property right is allegedly infringed by making the protected property publicly accessible via a website, the place where the unlawful act was committed is Germany if the asserted rights are protected in Germany and if the website is (also) publicly accessible in Germany. However, intended availability of the web presence in Germany (among other countries) is not a requirement (...). This - to me - is quite a funny piece of jurisdiction and probably one of the reasons why international mediation processes do exist.
- LocalH 9y ago
  Yet the plaintiff in this case rejected international mediation. They're hell bent on keeping this case in German court.

by s3nnyy 9y ago

thenaturalist 9y ago

See, they think they don't. From the court document: > The action is admissible. In particular, the District Court of Frankfurt am Main has international and local jurisdiction pursuant to § 32 ZPO (German Rules of Civil Procedure). According to § 32 ZPO, the court of the district where an unlawful act was committed has jurisdiction for suits brought against such acts. Unlawful acts within the meaning of § 32 ZPO also include copyright infringements. Along with local jurisdiction, this provision also governs the international jurisdiction of German courts. An unlawful act within the meaning of § 32 ZPO is deemed to have been committed both at the place where the offense was committed and at the place where the offense had its effect, so jurisdiction optionally applies to the place where the infringement was committed or where the legally protected interest was affected. A conclusive claim of facts substantiating an unlawful act committed within the judicial district is enough to establish jurisdiction. § 32 ZPO also covers claims for injunctive relief. According to § 32 ZPO, if a copyright or related property right is allegedly infringed by making the protected property publicly accessible via a website, the place where the unlawful act was committed is Germany if the asserted rights are protected in Germany and if the website is (also) publicly accessible in Germany. However, intended availability of the web presence in Germany (among other countries) is not a requirement (...). This - to me - is quite a funny piece of jurisdiction and probably one of the reasons why international mediation processes do exist.

LocalH 9y ago
Yet the plaintiff in this case rejected international mediation. They're hell bent on keeping this case in German court.