Tue, Mar. 02, 2004
Pixel Picky
CK - Washington. The pixel-pickiness of German courts lives on. Not disapprovingly, blogs Vertretbar.de and advobLAWg note that the Munich court of appeals decided on October 10, 2003 in a now final ruling that the identification of persons responsible for the content of websites needs to meet certain display requirements. Four pages of scrolls to reach a link to the Impressum provided under the Tele Data Statute is too much of an imposition on the user, the court found, when the screen display is set to a 1024 x 768 pixel resolution. Rare is the comment in Germany that the requirement for disclosure in an Impressum seems diametrically opposed to the otherwise strong protections of private data. Simon's Blawg, at least, affords some space to the issue of anonymity on the internet under freedom of speech principles.
CK - Washington. The pixel-pickiness of German courts lives on. Not disapprovingly, blogs Vertretbar.de and advobLAWg note that the Munich court of appeals decided on October 10, 2003 in a now final ruling that the identification of persons responsible for the content of websites needs to meet certain display requirements. Four pages of scrolls to reach a link to the Impressum provided under the Tele Data Statute is too much of an imposition on the user, the court found, when the screen display is set to a 1024 x 768 pixel resolution. Rare is the comment in Germany that the requirement for disclosure in an Impressum seems diametrically opposed to the otherwise strong protections of private data. Simon's Blawg, at least, affords some space to the issue of anonymity on the internet under freedom of speech principles.
Permalink
CURRENT :: 2003 :: 2004 :: 2005 :: 2006 :: 2007 :: 2008 :: 2009 :: 2010 :: 2011
:: 2012
:: 2013
:: 2014
:: 2015
:: 2016
:: 2017
:: 2018
:: 2019
German Reports: