4 ms·

And did the people who passed this law thought of businesses who have millions of visits per second and what the consequences of replying to every single email

And did the people who passed this law thought of businesses who have millions of visits per second and what the consequences of replying to every single email would cost to the company and society? Seems like Germany have some really backward laws when it comes to the web, starting with all their spying laws and making Google Street View close to illegal.

Tomte 12y ago
Nobody demands that even a single mail must be replied to. Do the people who make such outraged, generalised and sweeping statements online think of the consequences, i.e. that they look foolish?
- patrickaljord 12y ago
  If you define google customer by google user, then yes, they kind of have to.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    The idea here is to stay within what the court documents actually say otherwise this is just fantasy. The document does not define that every user has to be answered. In fact it makes it explicit that not an answer is a kind of answer too but that categoric rejection of the possibility of such an answer for technical reasons is not good enough. In other words: If you have a business address then you should at least look at / read your mail. Responding is optional.
- mseebach 12y ago
  > Nobody demands that even a single mail must be replied to. That is ostensibly the case, it's just that it doesn't fit very well with the fact that Google was just ruled against for doing exactly that: Not responding to even a single email. What, exactly, is the expectation here? Is it better that Google leaves people looking for help hanging in the dark, rather than auto responding with pointers to self-help?
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    I got from it that the sticking point was that they did not even bother to read the mail in principle, not even that they did not respond. The German in the ruling is quite complex though, so I'd better leave such analysis to someone who is a native speaker. My reading is that it is all about 'establishing contact' and not necessarily about receiving an email answer. http://www.vzbv.de/cps/rde/xbcr/vzbv/google-lg_berlin-2014-08-28.pdf http://www.vzbv.de/cps/rde/xbcr/vzbv/google-lg_berlin-2014-0... Page 4 at the bottom. "Es muesse fuer den Verbracher moeglich sein, den Dienstenanbieter auch ohne vorheriges Ausfuellen eines Formulrs zu kontaktieren." Freely translated: "It must be possible for the user, to contact the party offering a service without prior filling out of a form."
- Tomte 12y ago
  Page 11 of the ruling: "Es kann auch hiernach nicht Aufgabe des TMG sein, eine Antwort oder eine bestimmte Qualität der Antwort zu erzwingen. Es genügt die abstrakte Möglichkeit, dass Kommunikation aufgenommen wird, eine Reaktion erfolgt. Auch ein Nichtantworten kann eine Reaktion sein. Wenn aber Nichtantworten Prinzip ist, kann nicht mehr von Kommunikation die Rede sein." translated by me: "Hereafter it cannot be the function of the TMG to force a reply or a certain quality of the reply. The abstract possibility that communication is started, a reaction happens, suffices. A nonreply can be a reaction, as well. But if not replying is the principle, one cannot speak of communication anymore."
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    That was exactly my reading, thank you for the translation. The 'categoric rejection' was the problem, not the lack of a specific answer.
- coldtea 12y ago
  No, they just wanted to make a knee jerk anti-regulation sentiment.
jacquesm 12y ago
What is so backwards about companies that you do business with having a homebase somewhere and advertising that in plain sight? That would still be substantially less overhead than having a brick&mortar presence where ever they do business and those seem to be possible too. It makes good sense to me that if someone wants to do business with you that you need to be able to talk to them somehow. Even if they refuse to talk back. They still have to have a way to be informed of stuff. It's not as if millions of visitors per second automatically translates into millions of emails per second and if you keep your customers happy they typically do not email you all that frequently. I actually like those German laws, even though I'm not a resident.
currysausage 12y ago
> starting with all their spying laws What are you talking about? > and making Google Street View close to illegal. No, Street View is perfectly legal in Germany. There was public outrage, which I couldn't understand, but it wasn't a legal issue at all.

Tomte 12y ago

Nobody demands that even a single mail must be replied to. Do the people who make such outraged, generalised and sweeping statements online think of the consequences, i.e. that they look foolish?

patrickaljord 12y ago
If you define google customer by google user, then yes, they kind of have to.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  The idea here is to stay within what the court documents actually say otherwise this is just fantasy. The document does not define that every user has to be answered. In fact it makes it explicit that not an answer is a kind of answer too but that categoric rejection of the possibility of such an answer for technical reasons is not good enough. In other words: If you have a business address then you should at least look at / read your mail. Responding is optional.
mseebach 12y ago
> Nobody demands that even a single mail must be replied to. That is ostensibly the case, it's just that it doesn't fit very well with the fact that Google was just ruled against for doing exactly that: Not responding to even a single email. What, exactly, is the expectation here? Is it better that Google leaves people looking for help hanging in the dark, rather than auto responding with pointers to self-help?
- jacquesm 12y ago
  I got from it that the sticking point was that they did not even bother to read the mail in principle, not even that they did not respond. The German in the ruling is quite complex though, so I'd better leave such analysis to someone who is a native speaker. My reading is that it is all about 'establishing contact' and not necessarily about receiving an email answer. http://www.vzbv.de/cps/rde/xbcr/vzbv/google-lg_berlin-2014-08-28.pdf http://www.vzbv.de/cps/rde/xbcr/vzbv/google-lg_berlin-2014-0... Page 4 at the bottom. "Es muesse fuer den Verbracher moeglich sein, den Dienstenanbieter auch ohne vorheriges Ausfuellen eines Formulrs zu kontaktieren." Freely translated: "It must be possible for the user, to contact the party offering a service without prior filling out of a form."
Tomte 12y ago
Page 11 of the ruling: "Es kann auch hiernach nicht Aufgabe des TMG sein, eine Antwort oder eine bestimmte Qualität der Antwort zu erzwingen. Es genügt die abstrakte Möglichkeit, dass Kommunikation aufgenommen wird, eine Reaktion erfolgt. Auch ein Nichtantworten kann eine Reaktion sein. Wenn aber Nichtantworten Prinzip ist, kann nicht mehr von Kommunikation die Rede sein." translated by me: "Hereafter it cannot be the function of the TMG to force a reply or a certain quality of the reply. The abstract possibility that communication is started, a reaction happens, suffices. A nonreply can be a reaction, as well. But if not replying is the principle, one cannot speak of communication anymore."
- jacquesm 12y ago
  That was exactly my reading, thank you for the translation. The 'categoric rejection' was the problem, not the lack of a specific answer.
coldtea 12y ago
No, they just wanted to make a knee jerk anti-regulation sentiment.

jacquesm 12y ago

What is so backwards about companies that you do business with having a homebase somewhere and advertising that in plain sight? That would still be substantially less overhead than having a brick&mortar presence where ever they do business and those seem to be possible too. It makes good sense to me that if someone wants to do business with you that you need to be able to talk to them somehow. Even if they refuse to talk back. They still have to have a way to be informed of stuff. It's not as if millions of visitors per second automatically translates into millions of emails per second and if you keep your customers happy they typically do not email you all that frequently. I actually like those German laws, even though I'm not a resident.

currysausage 12y ago

> starting with all their spying laws What are you talking about? > and making Google Street View close to illegal. No, Street View is perfectly legal in Germany. There was public outrage, which I couldn't understand, but it wasn't a legal issue at all.