Interesting People mailing list archives

Re: German court orders wireless passwords for all


From: Dave Farber <dfarber () me com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 11:18:06 -0400





Begin forwarded message:

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo () w3 org>
Date: May 19, 2010 9:16:40 AM EDT
To: dpreed () reed com
Cc: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Re:    German court orders wireless passwords for all


Hi David, 

the main argument of lawyers with some understanding of networking and 
telecommunications is the following: 

The whole legal construct relies on liability for omitted diligence. In 
Germany, you can be liable if you haven't cleaned snow from the ways in front 
of your door and somebody falls down and is injured. You always need a not so 
distant danger, an obligation to care and a damage. So far the legal theory. 

Critics (including me) now put forward that considering the Internet as a 
danger is overstated as the Internet today is just part of our life and of the 
average risk thereof. So considering the Internet a danger is already 
stretching things a bit. 

Secondly, we need an obligation to care in relation to the person damaged. The 
person damaged is the music rightsholder. This means a person with a wifi has 
to care for rightsholders. Hmmm... As a fallback, they may have applied the 
theory of third party tort (interfering), where the third party can easily 
stop infringement while it is extraordinarily difficult to get the infringer 
himself. But this still sounds fishy as an obligation.

The damage is (not so) obvious for music downloads...

But wait a minute: They guy provided telecommunication services without fee by 
opening his wifi. He is liable for the copyright infringement of third 
parties. But why should he be liable if there are other people providing 
telecommunication services commercially that are not liable? This will be a 
serious legal question as the rule of law requires equal cases to be treated 
equally... 

I think the court made a turn here that it will not be able to sustain on the 
long run without also making ISPs and telco operators liable and thus opening 
the flood-gates for liability campaigns. 

This is why many people (including me) wait for the opinion.

BTW, the emotional reaction of many people against the decision is IMHO caused 
by the fact that the court negatively sanctioned altruistic behavior (open 
wifi). And altruistic behavior is one of the foundations of the Web to get 
critical mass for economies of scale.

Best, 

Rigo

On Wednesday 19 May 2010 02:25:46 David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:

From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>
Date: May 18, 2010 3:41:46 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: German court orders wireless passwords for all

This sounds like "if somebody discovers your keys in the car, takes the
car, and commits multiple murders, you will be prosecuted with the
likelihood of capital punishment, therefore leaving your keys in the car
should be grounds for prosecuting you for 'intent to commit multiple
murder'."

Admittedly, you foolishly left the keys in your car, so it's possible to
construe you are creating the opportunity for unknowable and perfectly
reasonable ranges of all possible crimes.  Therefore you are intentionally
causing harm.

Hmmm... we could use that legal theory to get people who don't use strong
passwords in their Facebook account reprimanded for "intent to let people
steal your identity and bully somebody to commit suicide".

This is a good example of "pre-crime" a la Minority Report.

On 05/18/2010 03:05 PM, Dave Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Rigo Wenning <rigo () w3 org>
Date: May 18, 2010 2:41:46 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: Re: [IP] Re:  German court orders wireless passwords for all




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Current thread: