Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
1–10 of 82 posts
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#2The defendant did not "make the law available for free", he (allegedly) distributed a copyrighted standards text. Which is not law. At all.
And no, it is not incorporated into law, either. Despite what some people usually claim.
(There are a few DIN standards that are actually incorporated, but I've never come across those, I think they are used in some building construction code or whatever).
I know, I also think it's bad that there is no way to read and use standards freely (or cheaply), but the headline is totally misleading.
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#3I know, you're enraged, but truthfulness is still not optional. The defendant did not "make the law available for free", he (allegedly) distributed a copyrighted standards text. Which is not law. At all. And no, it is not incorporated into law, either. Despite what some people usually claim. (There are a few DIN standards that are actually incorporated, but I've never come across those, I think they are used in some…
So you are disputing the part of the article that says: "Every country in the EU is required to implement and publish these standards."
I've followed Malamud's work in the USA and there he has been 100% accurate in his claims that the standards he publishes are incorporated into law by reference. You seem to be saying that he's wrong about how it works in the EU, and that what he published is not incorporated into law by reference. I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt given his history.
http://legalresearchplus.com/2008/09/27/carl-malamud-liberat...
If you have an explanation for how it is that he has mistakenly assumed that the standards he published are incorporated into EU law by reference, I'm all ears.
Don't forget the cited document here:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/european-standards/h...
Which is a directive of the European Parliament and Council that specifies DIN EN 1400, the baby pacifier standard he's being sued for publishing.
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#4Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#5There is a problem: traditionally standardizing bodies finance themselves by selling copies of the standard. I can see why someone might liberate the standards, but they should at least offer up alternative models for financing. The financing model may be obsolete, but the body that issues the standards is not.
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#6Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#7That being said it is unfortunate that the law refers to non open standards. And the penalties this guy risks are outrageous.
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#8I know, you're enraged, but truthfulness is still not optional. The defendant did not "make the law available for free", he (allegedly) distributed a copyrighted standards text. Which is not law. At all. And no, it is not incorporated into law, either. Despite what some people usually claim. (There are a few DIN standards that are actually incorporated, but I've never come across those, I think they are used in some…
And no, it is not incorporated into law, either. Despite what some people usually claim. So you are disputing the part of the article that says: "Every country in the EU is required to implement and publish these standards." I've followed Malamud's work in the USA and there he has been 100% accurate in his claims that the standards he publishes are incorporated into law by reference. You seem to be saying that he's w…
Legally it works like this:
1. The EU issues a directive. Directives are not directly binding (some gray areas have developed over the years) and must be implemented by national legislatures into national law. The directive is the base line, national legislators may go above and beyond what the directive calls for.
2. In Germany we have implemented this directive (as well as "my directive", that's why I claim to have some knowledge about this issue, as well) in the "Produktsicherheitsgesetz" (Product Safety Act). You can find a translation here: http://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDF-Meldungen/pro...
3. The law enables quite a few ministers to issue regulations that deal with specific things (in my example: the Ninth Regulation deals with machinery safety).
Those regulations usually refer back to the EU Directive, incorporating it partly.
For example, in the Ninth you can see (http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gsgv_9/__3.html) that some requirements are basically just worded as "must meet requirements A, B and C from 2006/42/EG" or "must provide documentation as per Annex I of 2006/42/EG)".
4. Law and Regulations must be obeyed. Not some "EU law". This law. And only this law.
The key insight is: how you fulfill the requirements is up to you. Also, the burden of proof that you fulfilled those requirements is yours.
5. Because those requirements are rather vague and abstract, and this burden of proof is not easily met, the law provides for some "convenience avenue" (well, and because that's the idea behind the EU's "New Approach"):
You may demonstrate that you meet the requirements of certain applicable standards. If you do this (and you still have the burden of proof here!), you are automatically assumed to be in compliance with the law and the regulations.
That's the so-called assumption of conformity.
6. That's where your linked table comes in: those are standards that are "harmonized under the Directive".
If you find a standard that's (partly) applicable (you may not use a nuclear reactor standard to claim conformance of your children's toys...) on that list, you may shift your burden of proof from the law and the regulations to the standard (as far as it's applicable).
7. So far it doesn't sound very exciting. You just swapped one set of requirements where you bear the burden of proof with another set of requirements where you also bear the burden of proof.
The thing is, those standards are tailored to your field, so they are much more practical and manageable.
And the real kicker is this: you can get certification by TÜV, BG and other "notified bodies" provided for by EU law, that you met the requirements of the standard. You probably won't get TÜV or BG to certify that you met the requirements of the law itself.
8. Okay, but isn't that "incorporation"?
No, it's not. Not legally. And not practically.
First, remember: you have to follow the German law. Not some Directive. The latter isn't directly binding to anyone, except the national states insofar, as they are required to implemented it.
The decision which standards are "harmonized" and thus invoke this assumption of conformity lies with EU organs, not national organs. So there is a real division of authority there.
And, most important: you're always free to disregard any and all harmonized standards. If you feel good about meeting the requirements of the national law and regulations without the help of harmonized standards (and in some fields you mostly have to do that anyway, because no really applicable harmonized standards exist), you're free to do so.
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#9If the law mandates use of (privately manufactured) safety mechanisms it doesn't mean that you are entitled to get those safety mechanisms for free. Similarly, if the law mandates that manufacturers comply with certain (privately manufactured) technical standards it doesn't mean that everybody is entitled to get a copy of those standards for free. That being said it is unfortunate that the law refers to non open stan…
Can you cite some case law for this assertion?
At least in the US, every court i'm aware of to confront the issue has decided that if they incorporate a standard by reference into a law, you must be allowed to access it for free, or it cannot be enforced against you.
Some even go further, and state it is no longer copyrightable. See, e.g., VEECK v. SOUTHERN BUILDING CODE CONGRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC (293 F.3d 791)
"Our short answer is that as law, the model codes enter the public domain and are not subject to the copyright holder's exclusive prerogatives. As model codes, however, the organization's works retain their protected status."
If you have contrary authority, i'd love to see it (veeck has, last i looked, 283+ citations).
Even those commentators who criticize the Veeck decision all agree that the public must be given access to the code, for free. The only portion they disagree on is whether incorporation causes the copy to enter the public domain or not (IE whether it's still copyrightable).
Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
And no, it is not incorporated into law, either. Despite what some people usually claim. So you are disputing the part of the article that says: "Every country in the EU is required to implement and publish these standards." I've followed Malamud's work in the USA and there he has been 100% accurate in his claims that the standards he publishes are incorporated into law by reference. You seem to be saying that he's w…
Look, I know, EU "law" is difficult. I happen to have a little bit of knowledge about that, because I work on safety-related systems in industrial automation, where the same legal mechanisms apply (although "my" directive is 2006/42/EG, not Directive 2001/95/EC). Legally it works like this: 1. The EU issues a directive. Directives are not directly binding (some gray areas have developed over the years) and must be im…
Sounds like you are agreeing with Malamud. Regardless of whether or not various certification authorities trust the word of the companies that implement products to match the directive, the directive is the law in Germany. Right?