3 ms·

I think the main moral of the story is not to base your company in Europe if you don't want to be subject to painful copyright litigation in German courts.

by ronsor 3y ago

alfanick 3y ago
Which are not enforceable, as we can see. Living in Germany? Downloaded a torrent and sent 16KiB of that torrent back, got a letter from random lawyer to pay 350eur to somewhere? Not enforceable.
- filterfiber 3y ago
  > Not enforceable. I'm not familiar with how lawsuits work in Europe/European countrys, but in the US anyone can sue anyone for any reason at any time (with very specific, few restrictions). If it's anything like the US, as long as it's not a completely spam/bogus lawsuit then it might not be enforcable but you still have to hire a lawyer and go through that painful process. AND it sounds to me like Europe is similar to the US in that you may be sued by a state/country you don't reside in as long as you technically operate there (which everyone does now with the internet).
  - alfanick 3y ago
    a) Law suit culture does not exist here, but yes you can, b) I'm truly speaking from experience... and a lot of people had that experience. You get a random useless letter from random useless agency that is making money from not lawsuits, but agreements from people who don't know they don't have to pay. It's a legalised scam kinda. Got a letter that you downloaded something sometime? Ignore. They want like 300-500eur to settle (it's not in court!). And they will not take it to court, because they instantly lose (and cover my costs of my lawyer) - they cannot actually prove *indeed you person* shared it, done. It's a business model of some shady (but legal) legal offices. Couple of edits after reading the OPs comment again: - most of the countries in Europe do not have precedence law, - you do not NEED to hire a lawyer, most things are easy.
    - galangalalgol 3y ago
      Does the loser always pay, or only if the judge rules the suit was frivolous? If it is always, that might cause the us not to have a lawsuit culture either.
      - alfanick 3y ago
        In most cases the loser or a person who initiated the lawsuit pays. (If winner initiated, doesn't matter, if loser initiated, well they pay).
cycomanic 3y ago
Well the courts decided pro quad9 so I think this is good news? Or are you saying that in the US you can't be the subject to copyright lawsuits (Let alone DCMA takedown notices)?
- thorncorona 3y ago
  Sony is now trying again in Italy :/
- kmeisthax 3y ago
  You absolutely can be subject to copyright lawsuits in the US. DMCA is also a US law. DCMA is the part of the US government that buys military parts from private companies :P German courts decided in favor of Quad9 on appeal, but they still had to go through a shitton of litigation to get there, which is scary. I will also point out that Germany is the reason why the US went to life+70 terms in the 90s, since they had the longest terms in the EU. Disney was able to play the EU off the US to get an extra few decades on Mickey Mouse. However, that seems only scarcely related to this lawsuit. Even if copyright terms were only a few years, we'd still have idiot companies trying to take down notorious markets through any intermediary they can yell at. And civil litigation is a horribly drawn out slog in every country. So I'm not sure what ronsor is saying other than a generic "fuck the EU" here.
tremon 3y ago
What a choice... painful copyright litigation in Europe, painful patent trolling in the US, or painful defenestration in Russia.
- dylan604 3y ago
  Now now, no self respecting data center has windows.
dfawcus 3y ago
The consequence is due to the impact of the Lugano Convention 2007, as the piece mentioned. So it is not just German courts, it is any court of an EU member state, plus those of Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. Which is possibly the same mechanism whereby they're now subject to action in Italy.

I think the main moral of the story is not to base your company in Europe if you don't want to be subject to painful copyright litigation in German courts.

by ronsor 3y ago

I think the main moral of the story is not to base your company in Europe if you don't want to be subject to painful copyright litigation in German courts.

alfanick 3y ago

Which are not enforceable, as we can see. Living in Germany? Downloaded a torrent and sent 16KiB of that torrent back, got a letter from random lawyer to pay 350eur to somewhere? Not enforceable.

filterfiber 3y ago
> Not enforceable. I'm not familiar with how lawsuits work in Europe/European countrys, but in the US anyone can sue anyone for any reason at any time (with very specific, few restrictions). If it's anything like the US, as long as it's not a completely spam/bogus lawsuit then it might not be enforcable but you still have to hire a lawyer and go through that painful process. AND it sounds to me like Europe is similar to the US in that you may be sued by a state/country you don't reside in as long as you technically operate there (which everyone does now with the internet).
- alfanick 3y ago
  a) Law suit culture does not exist here, but yes you can, b) I'm truly speaking from experience... and a lot of people had that experience. You get a random useless letter from random useless agency that is making money from not lawsuits, but agreements from people who don't know they don't have to pay. It's a legalised scam kinda. Got a letter that you downloaded something sometime? Ignore. They want like 300-500eur to settle (it's not in court!). And they will not take it to court, because they instantly lose (and cover my costs of my lawyer) - they cannot actually prove *indeed you person* shared it, done. It's a business model of some shady (but legal) legal offices. Couple of edits after reading the OPs comment again: - most of the countries in Europe do not have precedence law, - you do not NEED to hire a lawyer, most things are easy.
  - galangalalgol 3y ago
    Does the loser always pay, or only if the judge rules the suit was frivolous? If it is always, that might cause the us not to have a lawsuit culture either.
    - alfanick 3y ago
      In most cases the loser or a person who initiated the lawsuit pays. (If winner initiated, doesn't matter, if loser initiated, well they pay).

cycomanic 3y ago

Well the courts decided pro quad9 so I think this is good news? Or are you saying that in the US you can't be the subject to copyright lawsuits (Let alone DCMA takedown notices)?

thorncorona 3y ago
Sony is now trying again in Italy :/
kmeisthax 3y ago
You absolutely can be subject to copyright lawsuits in the US. DMCA is also a US law. DCMA is the part of the US government that buys military parts from private companies :P German courts decided in favor of Quad9 on appeal, but they still had to go through a shitton of litigation to get there, which is scary. I will also point out that Germany is the reason why the US went to life+70 terms in the 90s, since they had the longest terms in the EU. Disney was able to play the EU off the US to get an extra few decades on Mickey Mouse. However, that seems only scarcely related to this lawsuit. Even if copyright terms were only a few years, we'd still have idiot companies trying to take down notorious markets through any intermediary they can yell at. And civil litigation is a horribly drawn out slog in every country. So I'm not sure what ronsor is saying other than a generic "fuck the EU" here.

tremon 3y ago

What a choice... painful copyright litigation in Europe, painful patent trolling in the US, or painful defenestration in Russia.

dylan604 3y ago
Now now, no self respecting data center has windows.

dfawcus 3y ago

The consequence is due to the impact of the Lugano Convention 2007, as the piece mentioned. So it is not just German courts, it is any court of an EU member state, plus those of Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. Which is possibly the same mechanism whereby they're now subject to action in Italy.