4 ms·

> illegal where? On the internet, where project gutenberg is located. The argument put forward, that you repeated, implies just as much that someone could be p

> illegal where? On the internet, where project gutenberg is located. The argument put forward, that you repeated, implies just as much that someone could be prosecuted in a Chinese court for publishing a harsh (to the point of being illegal in China) criticism of China named freexinjiang.com, at least if the site included a Chinese version. And that, since it refers specifically to a Chinese province/area, would have at least some nexus to China, whereas Project Gutenberg has zero connection to Germany. Arguing the connection by language (the fact that German-language books of note exist to be digitized does not imply a connection to Germany the country) or Gutenberg's biography (what does the nationality of Gutenberg the historical person have to do with anything? Is shakespeare.com subject to uk laws?) is insanity. > I really didn't know [.us isn't commonly used] I didn't realize how this might not be intuitive to people in other countries, so... The U.S. mostly invented / was the testbed for the internet. It's standard in the U.S., and for almost any English-language website that's not seeking to be tied to a specific country of origin, to use .com .net or .org. I get that people in countries where English isn't official or where they're targeting the country's population as visitors will prefer .cc tlds either to indicate that their site targets that country's residents, or targets people who speak that country's primary language, but .us is not at all the norm in the USA; .com .net and .org generally serve that purpose, and .us is a distant fourth [1]. But, supposing .us were the primary domain used by U.S. organizations, even if Project Gutenberg didn't use .org but instead used a generic TLD, it would still have zero to do with Germany. [1] It's actually 6th, behind .xyz and .info, but those two probably have a higher percentage of spammy junk websites and email domains, so .us might be fourth in domains that aren't junk ecommerce advertising sites.

jhasse 9y ago
> On the internet I still don't understand what that means exactly. > whereas Project Gutenberg has zero connection to Germany. I disagree. > what does the nationality of Gutenberg the historical person have to do with anything? Is shakespeare.com subject to uk laws? There's a lot inbetween of zero connection with country X and subject to it's law. So regarding shakesbear.com: No, not necessarily.
- sjwright 9y ago
  > There's a lot inbetween No, there isn't. Or are you saying Austria could have a greater claim of jurisdiction over Tesla because of its name? Germany has no more "ownership" over the German language than England has over English.
- mcguire 9y ago
  Are you really asserting that a) anything in the German language falls under the jurisdiction of the German government, and that b) a relationship bearing on legal jurisdiction between two otherwise completely unrelated entities can be created by otherwise unrelated third parties?
  - slake 9y ago
    Point a is covered under GDPR. If you have German on your website their courts have jurisdiction. The language is so vague that they will have jurisdiction over all the world when it comes to PI privacy laws.
    - mcguire 9y ago
      That's...a little disturbing.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      If you have German on your website their courts have jurisdiction. Nope: "In order to determine whether such a controller or processor is offering goods or services to data subjects who are in the Union, it should be ascertained whether it is apparent that the controller or processor envisages offering services to data subjects in one or more Member States in the Union. (...) the mere accessibility of the controller’s, processor’s or an intermediary’s website in the Union, of an email address or of other contact details, or the use of a language generally used in the third country where the controller is established, is insufficient to ascertain such intention" (emphasis mine) As long as German is used in the country where PG is located - and it is - then it's not enough to show that they're targeting German citizens. https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-23/ https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-23/
Mindwipe 9y ago
> On the internet, where project gutenberg is located. The argument put forward, that you repeated, implies just as much that someone could be prosecuted in a Chinese court for publishing a harsh (to the point of being illegal in China) criticism of China named freexinjiang.com, at least if the site included a Chinese version. And that, since it refers specifically to a Chinese province/area, would have at least some nexus to China, whereas Project Gutenberg has zero connection to Germany. You can be. A US court would be pretty reluctant to enforce it, but you can and always could.

jhasse 9y ago

> On the internet I still don't understand what that means exactly. > whereas Project Gutenberg has zero connection to Germany. I disagree. > what does the nationality of Gutenberg the historical person have to do with anything? Is shakespeare.com subject to uk laws? There's a lot inbetween of zero connection with country X and subject to it's law. So regarding shakesbear.com: No, not necessarily.

sjwright 9y ago
> There's a lot inbetween No, there isn't. Or are you saying Austria could have a greater claim of jurisdiction over Tesla because of its name? Germany has no more "ownership" over the German language than England has over English.
mcguire 9y ago
Are you really asserting that a) anything in the German language falls under the jurisdiction of the German government, and that b) a relationship bearing on legal jurisdiction between two otherwise completely unrelated entities can be created by otherwise unrelated third parties?
- slake 9y ago
  Point a is covered under GDPR. If you have German on your website their courts have jurisdiction. The language is so vague that they will have jurisdiction over all the world when it comes to PI privacy laws.
  - mcguire 9y ago
    That's...a little disturbing.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    If you have German on your website their courts have jurisdiction. Nope: "In order to determine whether such a controller or processor is offering goods or services to data subjects who are in the Union, it should be ascertained whether it is apparent that the controller or processor envisages offering services to data subjects in one or more Member States in the Union. (...) the mere accessibility of the controller’s, processor’s or an intermediary’s website in the Union, of an email address or of other contact details, or the use of a language generally used in the third country where the controller is established, is insufficient to ascertain such intention" (emphasis mine) As long as German is used in the country where PG is located - and it is - then it's not enough to show that they're targeting German citizens. https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-23/ https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-23/

Mindwipe 9y ago

> On the internet, where project gutenberg is located. The argument put forward, that you repeated, implies just as much that someone could be prosecuted in a Chinese court for publishing a harsh (to the point of being illegal in China) criticism of China named freexinjiang.com, at least if the site included a Chinese version. And that, since it refers specifically to a Chinese province/area, would have at least some nexus to China, whereas Project Gutenberg has zero connection to Germany. You can be. A US court would be pretty reluctant to enforce it, but you can and always could.