Experts keep the blocking requests from Dusseldorf for highly doubtful and warn against a plan of the spiritual life
After the back and forth to the blocking of American websites for the Duseldorfer Provider Isis at the end of the past week to an embarrassed pr-disaster (farce without end: Provider is blocking now), is now the company calling for the network blockhead in the center of criticism. The Duseldorfer GovernmentSprasident Jurgen Bussov, which is at the same time established for the media supervision in North Rhine-Westphalia and expanded on the providers of the country for months, but stopped his action for successful.
Several associations and burger rights organizations have filed protests against the sole-ahead of Bussows. The media waxier liked to prevent North Rhine-Westphalian surfers with potentially youth hazardous and Nazi propaganda operations in consultation (Dusseldorf wants to prevail blocking American websites). In order to underline his demand, first to block four addresses set to his blacklist, the governmentSprasident Bubgelder has "up to 1 million marks" brought into play. In addition to the telecommunications company ISIS, where, among other things, Mannesmann Arcor and the Stadtwerke Dusseldorf are involved, there are therefore two more providers based on the domain name system (DNS) and ultimately only as symbolic "Lock" Implemented (grid lock for Fritzchen DOOF).
Friends has Bussow, who has so far on "See" The provider hopes and backed up before a judicial arrangement of the web blockade, not made with his moral in the presupposed project under network experts: for "Highly doubtful" Stop the German section of the Internet Society (ISOC.DE The procedure of the Dusseldorfer district government. In particular, the accusation that all the providers of the busy admonition will not demand the dissemination of right-wing radical thoughts, was "overdrawn".
Shot in the oven
The shot of the government sprayer is according to ISOC.DE Gone to the back. Through the media echo of the last days, the pages in question, to which in addition to the web offer of the Holocaust denier Gary Lueck and WWW are.Stormfront.org also the coarse part of the appetite corruption picture archive www.rotten.com belated, only really known. At the same time they found "Overall instructions for bypassing the accessibility by using alternative DNS servers" like on the pages of the Chaos Computer Clubs (CCC).
ISOC.DE calls for technical blocking on the network level, which against "Basic principles of the Internet" How the end-to-end paradigm violate and long term "Stability of the entire system dangerous" could, the scaling of self-protection by a clarified and critical handling of the medium Internet. Offers of Trades, who are legal according to the law their home country, love themselves in an increasingly globalized society "not just discuss away". It is a judge to the "Genuene tasks of the parents", to make murdered burger from their children and to demand their media expertise.
The providers and the orderwood
Sharp criticism also comes from the association of the German Internet economy ECO. "The providers are becoming a mandatory supervisor with dubious status", Scolded business administration Harald Summa. The industry lobbyist speaks of "Error attempts on the way to the censor state" and calls for a final clarification of the liability ie for providers by politics.
Both methods and advancing concerns introduce Sierk Hamann. The Legal Expert of the Group Article 5 canceled one "Lamination of the spiritual life", if the "self-appointed moral" prevailed by the Rhine. The system targeted by Bussow "Pretense" was no longer compatible with the Basic Law, if the Dusseldorfer list was extended to similar offers.
"Any administrative" Will regulate the flow of information
The criminal liability of content must also take "courteous court" and not "Any administrative" determine. Hamann has especially in the blocking request for Rotten.com, as the images of accident victims to be found there is essentially "Only from 18", but not illegal.
Provider warns the lawyer before a prisoner blockade of listed offers, as maybe civil law complaints of contradiction took on them on them. If Dusseldorf brought an arrangement, the providers could ultimately rely administrative law and the cost of ultimately ineffective blockages drove into the field. An important question should also be whether the affected did not have to be clarified in excess of the blocking.
In Dusseldorf, however, the media waxes are still unimpressed from the critique rattling on them. "We still have to determine if we are enough for the previous bulkheads", Does it be in the author. Bussow hold his "Legal obligation to act" Highly considered existing regulations "Excess Illegal Internet Offers". In doing so, he still clings on the media assessment contract (MDSV, who in his opinion prescribes a blocking.
Free access to communication networks in danger
But under legal experts, Just the opposite view is pleased "always strong popularity", Like Sascha Loetz, Research Associate at the Center for European Integration Research at the University of Bonn (ZEZ) opposite Telepolis. In his opinion, Access providers are subject to the less restrictive telecommunications law (TKG) — and not the Teledienstegesetz on federal or MDSV on Landel level.
Together with Christian Koenig, the head of the department for political, legal and institutional ies in the ZEZ, Loetz has clarified his attitude to the question of locking arrangements in a fundamental principle published in 1999. The researchers see access providers as a pure utility of data that are not subject to the liability principles laid down in the MDSV and comparable laws. Excluded is that access providers as "Storer in the sense of the police and regulatory law and the delight" could be used.
Objective of the legislator when adopting the legal framework of the Internet Internet is just below "The eligibility of free access to communication networks" been. This approach is wrongly operated by blocking obligations against access providers.
The state powerlessness against legal assets outside the own territory was thus driven to a balancing of the responsibility to the access provider. The activity of the access provider, which contributes to the construction of a modern communication infrastructure, was evaluated by a claim for the behavior of third parties.
In numerous incriminated content, so the experts continue, "If a blocking of the access provider is more likely to be a displacement of the facts: what the user can not retrieve, does not exist." Ultimately, a scheme to be brought with Article 5 is only to be ensured if you comply with the actual content provider.