3 ms·

> I don't see why Project Gutenberg thinks it isn't subject to German law. For the same reason that it's not subject to North Korean law, or Saudi law, or the

by ori_b 9y ago

> I don't see why Project Gutenberg thinks it isn't subject to German law. For the same reason that it's not subject to North Korean law, or Saudi law, or the laws of any tin pot dictatorship: It's not located there.

Xylakant 9y ago
That’s just not how it works by any standard. Target users in a country, be subject to laws in that country. Basically all courts will assume jurisdiction by that rule. See for example the Mega case: Kim dotcom was a NZ resident, he was still prosecuted in the US. The critical question is enforcement: no US law enforcement would carry out a North Korean court order. Things get problematic if the is a viable enforcement route: you make profits in a country, you have a subsidiary in that country, you want to travel to that country or you have employees in that country that might have to take the fall for you. What do you think why Twitter and Facebook and Apple all mostly conform to Chinese Law with Apple even moving the chinese iCloud key to China? Project Gutenberg seems to have volunteers in Germany that could theoretically be personally targeted with a lawsuit for aiding copyright infringement. Now what? Claim US jurisdiction, lean back and wait? Expose them to that (unlikely) scenario? I, as a rights holder, if I’d really wanted to push this, would at least threaten to go down that route. Even if it’s later struck down, the hassle for the volunteers would be massive.
- toast0 9y ago
  Does project Gutenberg identify their German based volunteers? Are they going to respond to a German order to identify them, assuming they're not responding to a German order to suppress books in the first place?
  - Xylakant 9y ago
    Up until now it was a no-brainer to identify with project Gutenberg, so the volunteers might have exposed themselves already. It probably still is, since the project complied with the court order. It’s mentioned in the plaintiffs argument which at least raises the possibility. So they might or might not be identifiable, but that question only matters for enforcement, not for the question of jurisdiction.

by ori_b 9y ago

Xylakant 9y ago

That’s just not how it works by any standard. Target users in a country, be subject to laws in that country. Basically all courts will assume jurisdiction by that rule. See for example the Mega case: Kim dotcom was a NZ resident, he was still prosecuted in the US. The critical question is enforcement: no US law enforcement would carry out a North Korean court order. Things get problematic if the is a viable enforcement route: you make profits in a country, you have a subsidiary in that country, you want to travel to that country or you have employees in that country that might have to take the fall for you. What do you think why Twitter and Facebook and Apple all mostly conform to Chinese Law with Apple even moving the chinese iCloud key to China? Project Gutenberg seems to have volunteers in Germany that could theoretically be personally targeted with a lawsuit for aiding copyright infringement. Now what? Claim US jurisdiction, lean back and wait? Expose them to that (unlikely) scenario? I, as a rights holder, if I’d really wanted to push this, would at least threaten to go down that route. Even if it’s later struck down, the hassle for the volunteers would be massive.

toast0 9y ago
Does project Gutenberg identify their German based volunteers? Are they going to respond to a German order to identify them, assuming they're not responding to a German order to suppress books in the first place?
- Xylakant 9y ago
  Up until now it was a no-brainer to identify with project Gutenberg, so the volunteers might have exposed themselves already. It probably still is, since the project complied with the court order. It’s mentioned in the plaintiffs argument which at least raises the possibility. So they might or might not be identifiable, but that question only matters for enforcement, not for the question of jurisdiction.